Re: JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura
From: Richard Schorn (Richard.Schorn_at_t-online.de)
Date: 11/28/04
- Next message: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Zenkin's paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)"
- Previous message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Prime ideal proof"
- In reply to: James Harris: "JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura"
- Next in thread: thdmuync: "Re: JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:11:45 +0100
Dear Mr. Harris
1 = 0 is a well known fact among insiders. There are
hundreds of proofs for this fact. The last one was
published by an Australian mathematician:
Jamie Simpson, "A New Proof that 1=0",
JRM vol 32, Number 2, page 142
Regards
Richard Schorn
James Harris wrote among other things:
> So, by the convention, sqrt(4) = 2, and that's good as, -2(-2) = 4, so
> if you say that sqrt(4) = 2 and sqrt(4) = -2, then 2 = -2, and 4 = 0,
> which is not good.
^^^^ ???
- Next message: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Zenkin's paper on Cantor (reply of Dr. Zenkin)"
- Previous message: Arturo Magidin: "Re: Prime ideal proof"
- In reply to: James Harris: "JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura"
- Next in thread: thdmuync: "Re: JSH: Operator ambiguity, Escultura"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]