Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Franziska Neugebauer <Franziska-Neugebauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:30:48 +0100
David Marcus wrote:
Franziska Neugebauer wrote:
David Marcus wrote:
[...] you are working with an infinite triangle [...]
,----[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle ]
| A triangle is one of the basic shapes of geometry: a polygon with
| three vertices [...]
`----
Are there really three vertices in WM's "triangle"?
No. But, I don't think an "infinite triangle" needs to be a triangle.
However, I'm open to suggestions for what to call it.
I would prefer discussions either with precisely defined (formalized)
"infinite triangles" or better without all these words borrowed from
Cantor/geometry/physics.
F. N.
--
xyz
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- References:
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Daniel Grubb
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Franziska Neugebauer
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantor Confusion
- Next by Date: Re: An infinite debate
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantor Confusion
- Next by thread: Re: Cantor Confusion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|