In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Friday, May 2, 2014 4:18:07 PM UTC-4, muec...@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote: > > On Friday, 2 May 2014 21:12:01 UTC+2, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > > So, you don't have formal proof. Just more hand-waving. Thought so.
> > Formal proves exist, but I am not willing to teach you the foundations > > here.
> HA, HA, HA!!!
> > > When it comes to foundational issues, everything must eventually be > > > formally defined or proven.
> > You are in error. Everything must be proven and understood. But formalsim > > has served for about 100 years to keep the fools foolish.
Lack of it certainly has kept WM foolish.
> Here we see the true depths of your ignorance, WM! When it comes to > foundational issues, you don't have a clue. Stick to your physics lab where > approximations are the rule. Here we must have absolute precision.
WM's "proof by experiment" is not valid in proper mathematics, but then WM is only trying to teach pre-engineering students, who are not even going to be scientists, much less mathematicians.