Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics

Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>> I suppose now you'll say that my definition of P({i}) makes sense
>> only
>> for *my* definition of N and not *your* definition, which mysteriously
>> grows as needed.
>
> So mysteriously that I can express the idea in a programming language,
> resulting in code that is understood by a stupid machine.

Clearly, your computer does not "understand" what N is, regardless of
what code you put into it. This is just meaningless verbiage meant to
insult.

But in any case, I haven't seen the code that you use to teach your
keen artificially intelligent computer what N is.

--
"If I were only dafter
I might be making hymns
To the liquor of your laughter
And the lacquer of your limbs." -- Emanuel Morgan, Opus 6
.

Relevant Pages
Loading