Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: § 534 Finis
Replies: 12   Last Post: Aug 15, 2014 2:45 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Tucsondrew@me.com Posts: 1,161 Registered: 5/24/13
Re: § 534 Finis
Posted: Aug 15, 2014 10:23 AM

On Friday, August 15, 2014 3:08:33 AM UTC-7, muec...@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 14 August 2014 02:00:50 UTC+2, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

> > >> You don't think the provable non-existence of un-indexed rationals has
> > >> any bearing on your claim?

> > > No. If this "provable non-existence" is accepted together with actual
> > > infinity, then we have a contradiction. Why do you think this
> > > contradiction would invalidated mathematical proof?

> > The provable non-existence to which I referred is the falsity of this
> > formula:
> > exists x c Q+: not(x c image(b))

> together with finished infinity. Therefore your approach is invalid.

You an Idiot.
You think that the Fact that No Finite Set can Exhaust All Q means that NO Infinite Set can do so. Go Learn something, you Asshole.

> But you should consider the mathematical proof that I used. It seems you simply try to suppress it.

You Final Conclusion is Not Valid. How many time must how many people show you this?

> Regards, WM

ZG

Date Subject Author
8/14/14 Ben Bacarisse
8/14/14 FredJeffries@gmail.com
8/15/14 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
8/15/14 Tucsondrew@me.com
8/15/14 mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
8/15/14 YBM
8/15/14 Tanu R.
8/15/14 Tanu R.
8/15/14 Virgil
8/15/14 Virgil
8/15/14 Virgil