Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin <crice5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:28:06 -0700
On Jul 13, 11:20 am, Calvin <cri...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
... again I
clearly understand that 0.0111... is the same as
0.111...
Another unfortunate typo.
0.0111... is the same as 0.1
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- References:
- Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Proginoskes
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Peter Webb
- Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- From: Calvin
- Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Prev by Date: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Next by Date: Collision probability (extension)
- Previous by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Next by thread: Re: Ultimate debunking of Cantor's Theory
- Index(es):