Date: Dec 29, 2012 10:13 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Simple Refutation of Cantor's Proof
In article

<9da26dd2-5d29-4d3c-97a3-bd9bb79a2ba4@6g2000pbh.googlegroups.com>,

camgirls@hush.com wrote:

> On Dec 30, 9:22 am, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

> > > > NOTHING EVER *NEEDS* to be constructed, DUMBASS!

> > > > YOU DON'T represent the function f(x)=2*x by

> >

> > > The derivative f'(x)=2

> >

> > > The integral f*(x)=x^2

> >

> > AN integral, but not THE integral.

> >

> >

>

> It HAS an integral!

It has infinitely many different integrals, though any two of them

differ only by a constant.

>

> It HAS a derivative.

But it has only one derivative!

>

> Your imaginary textual froth you make up and call functions DO NOT!!

>

> AD(pos) = 6 IFF DIAG(pos) < 5

> AD(pos) = 5 OTHERWISE

>

> What is the DERIVATIVE of that RUBBISH?

Since it is not even a continuous function, what misleads you to suppose

it needs to have a derivative?

>

> You CLAIM it is completed to INFINITY!

>

> W H A T * I S * T H E * I N T E G R A L ?

Since neither its domain nor its range includes any real intervals what

misleads you to suppose that it has an integral?

>

> ANWER THE QUESTIONS VIRGIL

Your questions reveal either your abysmal ignorance of mathematics, or

your stupidity, or more likely both.

>

> OR STOP TRASHING ALL MY POSTS!

I am trying to improve them, but you keep making them worse.

--