Re: So you want APPROACHABLE oo, REAL oo, INTEGER oo, COUNTABLE oo, HIGHER oo, MEGA oo's
From: Barb Knox (see_at_sig.below)
Date: 01/29/05
- Next message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: THERE ARE oo NUMBERS IN N"
- Previous message: Mike Oliver: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "Re: So you want APPROACHABLE oo, REAL oo, INTEGER oo, COUNTABLE oo, HIGHER oo, MEGA oo's"
- Next in thread: Keith A. Lewis: "Re: So you want APPROACHABLE oo, REAL oo, INTEGER oo, COUNTABLE oo, HIGHER oo, MEGA oo's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 11:31:13 +1300
In article <3611mrF4ufj97U1@individual.net>, "|-|erc" <H@r.c> wrote:
[snip]
> CAN ANYONE HERE FIND ONE MISTAKE THAT I HAVE EVER MADE IN LOGIC OR MATHS?
Many have already found many.
>
>Can anyone *prove* I have made any mistake at all ever?
"Prove" in whose system? In the usual system of ordinary mathematical
discourse, everyone (but you) who has read a few of your posts has had it
repeatedly proven that you make all sorts of mistakes. In *your* system of
beliefs (call it H), the axioms "Andrew Cooper is god" plus "God never makes
mistakes" plus Con(H) taken together insure that YOU WILL NEVER recognise
your many and glaring mistakes regardless of how they are presented to you.
The solution to this impasse is not mathematical but probably
pharmacological.
>Because there are 1000 threads in sci.math and sci.logic that I've posted on
>and most every one is me making the final point.
Multiple-choice question: Why does "Herc" almost always have the last word?
-- (A) Because he is fundamentally correct and his opponents eventually see that and slink away into the darkness. (B) Because he is fundamentally looney and his opponents eventually get tired of trying to get him to engage in the sane mathematical discourse. (C) Because he wants to, and thus goes on and on and on and on until his opponents cease finding any value (entertainment or otherwise) in his repetitive blather. [snip] -- --------------------------- | BBB b \ Barbara at LivingHistory stop co stop uk | B B aa rrr b | | BBB a a r bbb | Quidquid latine dictum sit, | B B a a r b b | altum viditur. | BBB aa a r bbb | -----------------------------
- Next message: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: THERE ARE oo NUMBERS IN N"
- Previous message: Mike Oliver: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "Re: So you want APPROACHABLE oo, REAL oo, INTEGER oo, COUNTABLE oo, HIGHER oo, MEGA oo's"
- Next in thread: Keith A. Lewis: "Re: So you want APPROACHABLE oo, REAL oo, INTEGER oo, COUNTABLE oo, HIGHER oo, MEGA oo's"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|