Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: "MoeBlee" <jazzmobe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Jan 2006 11:02:08 -0800
Han de Bruijn wrote:
> MoeBlee wrote:
>
> > What axioms is Han discussing? Whatever his exact position, he just
> > posted his aversion to axiomatics in at least one sense.
>
> Axioms, axioms ... I have no aversion against axioms, only against
> axioms and logic _and that's it_. I find there is more to mathematics
> than just axioms and logic.
Who denies this?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- References:
- Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: david petry
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han . deBruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han . deBruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: MoeBlee
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by Date: Re: Insphere of a tetrahedron
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|