Date: Feb 2, 2013 5:21 PM
Author: Graham Cooper
Subject: Re: Outline: A Program to establish the continuity of points in a line
On Feb 3, 7:22 am, FredJeffries <fredjeffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 1:02 pm, "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com>
> > It might be remiss to not note that of course there are a wide variety
> > of mathematical developments over time and in history that don't
> > necessarily have as much approbation as they should in the
> > contemporary, with Cauchy/Dedekind/Weierstrass in analysis then to
> > Cantor, Russell, and Zermelo and Fraenkel in axiomatic foundations as
> > "modern". Newton's, Leibniz', and du Bois-Reymond's infinitesimals
> > are notably absent from the one (though Leibniz' notation survives),
> > and primary notions of Kant, Hegel, Frege, Quine, Popper the other.
> > As well, there are modern attempts to formulate these particular
> > notions of the integers as infinite and reals as complete that aren't
> > the standard, in light of and in extension of the standard, for
> > example of Aczel, Priest, Boucher, Paris and Kirby, and Bishop and
> > Cheng.
> There is one outstanding difference between all of those and the
> gibberish you post: All of them can be used to solve actual problems
> whereas you still cannot show how to use your nonsense to do even
> something as simple as determining the area of a triangle.
Cantor's Proof was the 1ST DUMB PROOF
in Mathematics that opened the flood gates to
all the dumb supermath proofs that followed!
Proving everything you cannot_do is the only maths Fred can do!