In article <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org (Binary Freedom) wrote:
> now i dont even know this is geometry or not, but the word "trisecular" > sounds geometry ^.^' You'll see why it is amusing after you read it! > > If a trisecular deunification within the Strumthurn-Clyde group is > transgressional beyond the zone of subangular tonistics, > prove that the neoistic totality cannot be a subsidiary of the congruent > nano-flex classificationism. >
* Smith-Slattery answered this question in, I think, 1887 before the Hartley-McMine-Slobodosky continuum axioms were proposed.