Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:33:13 +0100
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
You know what's nonsense? Inventing new terms for perfectly standard
concepts. Especially when those new terms include inexplicable
normative overtones.
You know what's nonsense? Not being able to get a trivial message across
despite several posters on it. The function that I mentioned IS nonsense
at x = 0 in all of the sciences where mathematics may be applied. And it
is not because *I* say it.
Han de Bruijn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Virgil
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jiri Lebl
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: stephen
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- References:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: david petry
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Virgil
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: david petry
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jiri Lebl
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jiri Lebl
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by Date: Re: Best way to fit data on a tape
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|