On 6 Dez., 21:29, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > In article > <a70f6b2c-c9a2-426d-9da4-70ad9785b...@o6g2000yql.googlegroups.com>, > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > On 6 Dez., 11:07, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > > Two *sides* with an angle defined by these sides define a triangle. > > > > Not unless both sides have endpoints other than the one they share. > > > And in WM's whatever-it-is, neither side has one. > > > It is not enough that all points are present? > > It would be, but the critical ones aren't!
How can the critical points be missing if *all* pojnts are thereß > > > > > > > We have one side of lenght 1*aleph_0 and the other side of length > > > > sqrt(2)* aleph_0. > > > > Aleph_0 may be either an ordinality or a cardinality, dependent on > > > usage, but is never a "length". > > > A unit lenght 1 times aleph_0 is what? > > Nonsense!
A unit times aleph_0 is aleph_0. But I agree. It is really nonsense.