Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: "*** T. Winter" <***.Winter@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:29:51 GMT
In article <1174140572.700528.281050@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
On 16 Mrz., 16:35, "*** T. Winter" <***.Win...@xxxxxx> wrote:....
He assumed that he could multiply together an assigned multitude of primes.
That need not be assumed. That is obvious. Even for a Greek it was
possible by continued repetition of products of three factors.
Of course it is obvious.
Not that you could multiply together *all* of them.
He *proved*, by contradiction, that he could not multiply all
together.
Can you provide me *where* he did prove that? The only thing he *did*
prove that there are more primes than any assigned number of primes,
using that you can multiply together an assigned number of primes.
--
*** t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~***/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- References:
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- From: mueckenh
- Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Prev by Date: finite and finite type homomorphisms of rings
- Next by Date: Re: Noetherian rings
- Previous by thread: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Next by thread: Re: Review of Mueckenheims book.
- Index(es):