On 10/13/2013 1:18 AM, Arturo Magidin wrote: > On Saturday, October 12, 2013 7:47:12 PM UTC-5, Hetware wrote: >> On 10/8/2013 12:43 AM, Arturo Magidin wrote: >> >>> On Monday, October 7, 2013 7:52:32 PM UTC-5, Hetware wrote: >> >> >> >>>> Too late, I already have. I now realize I was asserting my >> >>>> assumptions >> >>>> >> >>>> in the wrong order. >> >>> >> >>> It wasn't a problem of order. The problem was that you were >>> asserting >> >>> assumptions without warrant. >> >>> >> >> >> >> I can assert a function to be continuous, > > You can assert anything you want, true. It doesn't stop you from > being wrong for "asserting" what you should not be asserting without > warrant. > > In particular, functions are not "declared" to be continuous, they > are not "assumed" to be continuous, and they are not "asserted" to be > continuous.
That's nonsense. In variational calculus we assert the existence of an infinite number of continuous, twice differentiable functions which coincide at the boundaries of the parameter domain, but are otherwise arbitrary.
A statement such as "let M be a smooth manifold", asserts the existence of a continuous function.
> Anyone who asserts a function is continuous is committing an error. > > And no amount of sophistry, and no amount of empty, fatuous rethoric > about "authority of mortals" and "mental slavery" will get you out of > it. > > You are pontificating out of a position of both ignorance and > arrogance. > > > And I know you don't realize that; you've given ample evidence of > this. > > You know why you don't realize it? > > Because you are a pompous, fatuous ignoramus. > > 'nough said. > > > >> You quoted yourself and made claims about my responses, but cited >> none >> >> of those responses. > > Because they were contained in the message in which you requested > that I quote you. > > Now you are just being dishonest > > So. Ignorant. Pompous. And dishonest. The triple crown of the > internet troll. Congrats. > > Now go stroke your ego somewhere else. >