Date: Oct 5, 2017 12:28 AM
Author: zelos.malum@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Zelos Malum can't even get the simplest logic correct.

Den onsdag 4 oktober 2017 kl. 19:26:04 UTC+2 skrev John Gabriel:
> On Wednesday, 4 October 2017 12:09:50 UTC-4, Me wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 11:38:08 AM UTC+2, John Gabriel wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 4 October 2017 05:35:05 UTC-4, John Gabriel wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, 4 October 2017 05:30:01 UTC-4, Me wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 5:14:52 PM UTC+2, John Gabriel wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What matters is that L={x|-1<pi}, U={x|5>pi} ...
> > > > > >

> > > > > You obviosuly got that wrong, John. I guess you meant
> > > > >
> > > > > L = {x e Q : -1 < x < pi} and U = {x e Q : pi < x < 4}
> > > > >
> > > > > here, right?

> > > >
> > > > YES.
> > > >

> > > > >
> > > > > ("{x|-1<pi}" and "{x|5>pi}" look rather strange, to say the least.)

> > >
> > > I am always tired.

> >
> > I'm sorry to hear that, John.
> >

> > > Errors like that sometimes evade me, but they are minor
> >
> > Agree.
> >

> > > and anyone with some brains can do an auto-correct.
> >
> > Not necessarily. Moreover sometimes these errors are not just "typos" but "thinkos". THAT are the serious ones. Hence it's helful to ask if in in doubt.
> >
> > But now it's clear that you aren't taking about a Dedekind Cut here, John.
> >
> > Sorry about that.

>
> Sorry to hear you think so. I had imagined you had a little more smarts than the other morons.
>
> I am definitely talking about a Dedekind Cut. There is no doubt about this whatsoever.


You aren't, we have shown time and time again that your thing violates teh definition, hence is not a dedekinds cut.