Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers
From: Robin Chapman (rjc_at_ivorynospamtower.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: 02/06/05
- Next message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Of course Cantors diagonalization is ok was Re: Where's respect?...."
- Previous message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- In reply to: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Next in thread: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Reply: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 14:23:49 +0000
examachine@gmail.com wrote:
> Robin Chapman wrote:
>> Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>>
>> > Eckard, I think Mueckenheim is an ultrafinitist.
>>
>> That's not the word I would choose.
>
> Would you choose "heretic"?
I'll give you a clue: it begins with W and ends in anker.
-- "In Z, are there integers with an infinite number of digits?" Eray Ozkural, sci.math, 11 Sep 2004 http://tinyurl.com/3mokx
- Next message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Of course Cantors diagonalization is ok was Re: Where's respect?...."
- Previous message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- In reply to: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Next in thread: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Reply: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Where's respect? was Re: Corrective interpretation of real numbers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|