Re: .9999... = 1

From: Randy Poe (poespam-trap_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/30/04 

Date: 30 Sep 2004 07:58:20 -0700

dwb1729@yahoo.com (David Bandel) wrote in message news:<a88af92f.0409291044.5bed315c@posting.google.com>...

> no.
> the fact that ~Y -> ~X is NOT equivelant to ~X -> ~Y is precisely
> what i've been stating here. read more carefully.. and post less.

Now you're having trouble just writing down simple
symbolic statements. Here's what you said two posts ago:

> >> >> >well that's not very logical. you basiclaly said this:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >a -> b is equivelant to ~a -> ~b

See? You say the argument is about a->b being
equivalent to ~a->~b.

Now you say that the argument is about "~Y->~X" being
equivalent to "~X->~Y".

Do you really think that's "precisely what you've been stating"
given the quote as to what you've actually been stating?

              - Randy

Relevant Pages