Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********

rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com
Date: 01/30/05 

Date: 29 Jan 2005 18:49:25 -0800

|-|erc wrote:
> KEEP IGNORING MY BREAKTHROUGHS SCI.MATH
> REAL SHOWMANSHIP.. NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY BALLS TO ADMIT AN ERROR
>
> All it's going to take is one clever journalist to expose the
mathematics community
> as the super hyped lying deceitful fools, the biggest mass of SHEEP
in history who
> use every MOB tactic in the book and don't know a number from a
doorknob.
> For decades keep on going thinking they're untouchable when they're
just
> building further and further theoretic justifactions of a
mass_foundation_of_errors.
>
>
> The REAL reason behind hyperinfinity : nobody has used a computable
real counting scheme
> in practice yet!
>
> The REAL reason behind incompleteness : nobody has completed a formal
model yet!
>
>
> When I correct the OBVIOUS FLAW in Omega in Mathsworld, you don't all
ignore
> it or say "read the book", YOU ADMIT ERROR, YOU SUBSTATIATE YOUR
CLAIM
> or YOU LET ME TALK.
>
> Herc
> --
> Throw away the chicken salad, and put a KNIFE
> on the bread, and look at the sandwich as you butter it!
> I don't need the chicken salad John!

What's the obvious flaw?