Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Re: WMytheology § 293
Replies: 10   Last Post: Jun 30, 2013 4:30 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Virgil Posts: 8,833 Registered: 1/6/11
Re: WMytheology � 293
Posted: Jun 21, 2013 3:39 PM

mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:

> On Thursday, 20 June 2013 23:54:10 UTC+2, Virgil wrote:
> > In article
> > <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 20 Jun., 20:25, FredJeffries
> > <fredjeffr...@gmail.com> >

>
> > > > No. A sequence is a function with domain the natural numbers.
>
> > > However, have you really not understood that the sets of a sequence of
> > > sets can be unioned?

>
> > How is "A sequence is a function with domain the natural numbers."
> > incompatible with "a sequence o sets can be unioned"? They are certainly
> > compatible

>
> Not in FredJeffries' world. FredJeffries wrote:
>
> ==================================
> A sequence is not a set. Speaking of taking the union of a sequence is
> gibberish. Treating a sequence of sets as a set of sets is the work of a
> chowderhead, a clown or a charlatan.
> ==================================
>
> Regards, WM

Which only shows that WM is not the only one to be wrong here.
--

Date Subject Author
6/20/13 FredJeffries@gmail.com
6/20/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
6/20/13 FredJeffries@gmail.com
6/20/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
6/20/13 FredJeffries@gmail.com
6/20/13 Virgil
6/30/13 Scott Berg
6/30/13 Virgil
6/20/13 Virgil
6/21/13 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
6/21/13 Virgil