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.

Replies: 62   Last Post: Feb 24, 2014 10:17 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Wizard-Of-Oz Posts: 404 Registered: 12/28/13
Posted: Feb 23, 2014 4:38 PM

John Gabriel <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote in

> On Sunday, 23 February 2014 15:30:52 UTC+2, Moron-Of-Oz wrote:
>> >> Surely saying all rooms are occupied
>> >> is equivalent to Saying there is no room that is unoccupied
>> >> In either case, there would be no need for a 'last room'.

>
> There is no surely in mathematics you fucking moron.

There is

> Surely, does not
> constitute proof.

I didn't posit it as a proof, it is simple a statement of fact.

> Making an assumption all rooms are occupied does not
> mean it is true.

It is when you are specifying the scenario.

>> He who?
>> It depends on whether there are enough guests for each room.

>
> Ha, ha! You monkey!

I guess that means you agree

>> If there is a one-to-one mapping of guests to rooms, then it IS the
>> case that all the rooms are occupied.

>
> You can say nothing at any time about "all the rooms".

Yes you can.

> You can talk
> about n rooms. Not all the rooms.

We are both talking about all the rooms. Its easy .. I'll do it again:
all the rooms are occupied. See .. I talked (virtually) about it

We use the upside-down A symbol in mathematic notation to talk about all
of something. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with it, as it isn't usually
taught in primary school

>> > No last room => all rooms not occupied.
>> No .. it doesn't imply that at all.
>
> Yes, it does imply that.

Not at all.

> It's a fucked up argument by a moron
> (Hilbert) and his moron followers - YOU!

Let's say room 1 is occupied. There is no last room. You now say that
means all rooms are not occupied. So room 1 is not occupied.

>> Why would all of the room be unoccupied? Or did you mean to say 'not
>> all rooms occupied'? In which case it depends on the set of guests.

>
> OMG: You are infinitely stupid.

Not at all, its just that what your wrote was so obviously wrong that I
thought you may have made a mistake.

Clearly you're just a moron.
.
>> If there is no unoccupied room (the hotel is 'full') then there IS a
>> one-to-one mapping of guests to rooms. Both sets are 'infinite'.

>
>> I didn't say that at all. If you're going to criticise, as least
>> criticise what I said, and not your own inventions of what you
>> imagine I said.

>
> You said it moron.

Said what? You dishonestly snipped what it was you claimed I said.

You're embarrased by yet another mistake on your part.

Why do you bother? Every time you post you prove you don't belong here
with honest mathematicians. You're a fraud and a liar.

> In fact, half the time trolls like you don't know
> what they are saying. You are a troll. Everyone on this forum knows
> you are a nobody. I am real. My name is John Gabriel. What's your real
> name troll?