Re: 0 * X = null?
From: Dwayne (DwayneOH_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Mike Oliver: "Re: Q_=B7_=B7_Have_You_Heard_The_?= Good News? · · ·"
- Previous message: bernard massé: "Re: Drawing graphs by hand"
- In reply to: snafu: "0 * X = null?"
- Next in thread: Oscar Lanzi III: "Re: 0 * X = null?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 30 Jan 2005 09:56:22 -0800
Your friend is changing the terms of the description on you midway.
That is, and stated by others, he is using the number system to count
X's as in the "2 X's is 2*X. Thus, in this SAME context, 0 X's is 0*X.
If you had two apples and someone took them both, IE 2*A - 2*A, you
would have zero apples, IE 0*A. You might still have other things like
oranges, cars, air, etc.
Thus, the statement "If you had 0 Xs, you would have 0 * X" should be
"If you had 0 Xs, you would have no X's". If the context is counting
X's then it must stay with counting X's and not jump to something else.
In general, this is the premise of many deceptions: A subtle change in
context.
- Next message: Mike Oliver: "Re: Q_=B7_=B7_Have_You_Heard_The_?= Good News? · · ·"
- Previous message: bernard massé: "Re: Drawing graphs by hand"
- In reply to: snafu: "0 * X = null?"
- Next in thread: Oscar Lanzi III: "Re: 0 * X = null?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
