Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: G. Frege <nomail@invalid>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:15:20 +0200
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 09:56:14 -0700, WM <mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well, only for a mathematical illiterates like WM.Worse. It is selfcontradictory. Not even an empty set of such
1. Your definition of WM-triangle:
A figure is called WM-triangle iff
1. it has three corners, and
2. it has zero corners.
is not identical with the common definition of triangle
triangles exists.
For all others the set of WM-triangles is the empty set.
F.
--
E-mail: info<at>simple-line<dot>de
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: * says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Franziska Neugebauer
- Re: * says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- References:
- *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Franziska Neugebauer
- Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Franziska Neugebauer
- Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Prev by Date: Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Next by Date: Re: searching for
- Previous by thread: Re: *** T. Winter says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Next by thread: Re: * says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Index(es):
Loading