Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Albert Wagner (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 03/23/05
- Next message: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:31:47 -0600
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
<snip>
> In Bilotta's sentence, "Shiver" is an apposition to the phrase
> "imaginary numbers", not a an adjective qualifying "numbers."
Oh. OK. Thanks, Wolf. Imaginary numbers I understand. I
wonder why he injected *shiver*.
-- "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." - -- Tolstoy
- Next message: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Wolf Kirchmeir: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|