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.
--