Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1
From: Keckman (keckman_at_welho.com)
Date: 10/04/04
- Next message: S. Enterprize Company: "Re: (.999999... == 1) = 1 <--No, if it does 0 =1"
- Previous message: Old Man: "Re: K. Advanced SR-cult Idiocies and Corruption"
- In reply to: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Next in thread: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Reply: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 07:37:43 +0300
On 3 Oct 2004 18:29:18 -0700, Randy Poe <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> How can you but 6 natural to any set without that biggest is 6?
>
> What?
>
Take any 6 natural numbers you want and put them to set.
What must be the biggest natural number in that set?
>> "Everyone takes as much place there"
>
> What?
Maybe i just have to say 1=1 because you don't undestand either.
Naturals are not like qeue that's items goes smaller and smaller. "They
all takes us much place".
n+1 - n = 1
If that's queue's length is supposed to be oo then there is item oo.
But i say that there is not infinite number of numbers in N.
No matter how faraway the amount is allways finite. And the size, bigness
or whatever of the
biggest number in N is too finite. We stay in step 1 forever. Infinite
does not exist.
- Next message: S. Enterprize Company: "Re: (.999999... == 1) = 1 <--No, if it does 0 =1"
- Previous message: Old Man: "Re: K. Advanced SR-cult Idiocies and Corruption"
- In reply to: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Next in thread: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Reply: Randy Poe: "Re: This Month's Thought on Fermat's Last Theorem: 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|