Date: Dec 12, 2012 2:14 PM
Author: Alan Smaill
Subject: Re: fom - 01 - preface

WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:

> On 12 Dez., 17:07, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> <spamt...@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:

>> In <virgil-7E972C.00424412122...@BIGNEWS.USENETMONSTER.COM>, on
>> 12/12/2012
>>    at 12:42 AM, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> said:
>>

>> >It is hardly clear from the snipped quote from my post that
>> >he/she/it necessarily refers to Cantor.

>>
>> In fact, it should have been clear the "s/h/it" referred to WM. It was
>> not Cantor who made the claim.

>
> So you are not only a coward who is unable to admit that s/h/it has
> made a mistake (or is unable to perform first semester proofs), but
> also too uncultured to know what s/h/it talks about.
>
> Cantor said: Die bisherige Darstellung meiner Untersuchungen in der
> Mannigfaltigkeitslehre ist an einen Punkt gelangt, wo ihre Fortführung
> von einer Erweiterung des realen ganzen Zahlbegriffs (extension of the
> notion of real whole numbers) über die bisherigen Grenzen hinaus
> abhängig wird, und zwar fällt diese Erweiterung in eine Richtung, in
> welcher sie meines Wissens bisher noch von niemandem gesucht worden
> ist.


Still no definition of multiplication of transfinite numbers
with anything other than other ordinal or cardinal numbers.



>
> Regards, WM


--
Alan Smaill