Re: About pii and integers
From: Keckman (keckman_at_welho.com)
Date: 09/30/04
- Next message: Daniel W. Johnson: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Previous message: Herman Rubin: "Re: No Proofs in Lecture: A First Year Graduate Experience"
- In reply to: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Next in thread: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Reply: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:53:46 +0300
On 30 Sep 2004 08:03:51 -0700, Randy Poe <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hey come oon boys. The http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Peano_axioms is a
definition of
natural numbers. If it does not tell you _nothing_ about natural number
then what the hell
you think those natural numbers are?
How do you define the concept natural numbers if not by Peano's axioms?
I did'nt take the earlier post here becaase it was so
distorting,falsifying ,misconstrueing ,misinterpreting,misrepresenting
,perverting ,twisting and wrenching
about all i have said that i leave it there.
and btw, earlier in some post was discussed how there was talking about
intuition in some children's
web-page but if you read that link there is two something abouit intuition
(not just for children)
-- Petri Keckman
- Next message: Daniel W. Johnson: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Previous message: Herman Rubin: "Re: No Proofs in Lecture: A First Year Graduate Experience"
- In reply to: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Next in thread: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Reply: Randy Poe: "Re: About pii and integers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]