Date: Oct 4, 2017 7:45 AM
Author: zelos.malum@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Irrefutable proofs that both Dedekind and Cauchy did not produce<br> any valid construction of the mythical "real" number

Den onsdag 4 oktober 2017 kl. 11:20:36 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
> On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 23:10:37 UTC-4, Zelos Malum wrote:
> > Den tisdag 3 oktober 2017 kl. 19:16:15 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
> > > On Tuesday, 3 October 2017 12:32:26 UTC-4, Markus Klyver wrote:
> > > > Den fredag 29 september 2017 kl. 14:06:42 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
> > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-mOEooW03iLSTROakNyVXlQUEU
> > > > >
> > > > > Comments are unwelcome and will be ignored.
> > > > >
> > > > > Posted on this newsgroup in the interests of public education and to eradicate ignorance and stupidity from mainstream mythmatics.
> > > > >
> > > > > gilstrang@gmail.com (MIT)
> > > > > huizenga@psu.edu (HARVARD)
> > > > > andersk@mit.edu (MIT)
> > > > > david.ullrich@math.okstate.edu (David Ullrich)
> > > > > djoyce@clarku.edu
> > > > > markcc@gmail.com

> > > >
> > > > Those are not Dedekind cuts.

> > >
> > > Of course they are monkey!

> >
> > Of course they aren't, because as said, we can show, trivially, it is not using even the most general definition!.

>
> "Nah Uh" doesn't show anything moron!


and going "uh uh!" doesn't show it to be true either you moron. I have repeatingly shown you where they fail using it all, you are just too stupid to get it. But you know, I am generous, want me to do it again?