Date: Mar 20, 2013 3:18 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224

In article 
<98702dcf-00bf-4de3-b7cf-4b3f86a3682c@fn10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 20 Mrz., 17:42, YBM <ybm...@nooos.fr.invalid> wrote:
> > Le 20/03/2013 17:35, WM a écrit :
> >

> > > On 20 Mrz., 17:18, YBM <ybm...@nooos.fr.invalid> wrote:
> > >> Proof, in the Mückenheim way, that an dog with no legs has two legs.
> >
> > > It is a pity that you have no idea of what set-inclusion means. But I
> > > am not surprised.

> >
> > The pity is that you do not recognize you OWN way of "prooving"
> > statement when you are in face of it.

>
> I did it my way.
> I'll state my case of which I'm certain.
>
> But if you have any remarks apart from silly dys-analogies, you are
> invited to try to write mathematics.


Writing mathematics, other than in copying or paraphrasing the work of
others, is clearly beyond WM's demonstrated capacities.
--