Re: Delusions and occasional bleak truth

On Nov 27, 10:01 pm, David Ullrich <ullr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Venkat Reddy wrote:
On Nov 27, 8:56 pm, Angus Rodgers <twir...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:34:28 -0800 (PST), Venkat Reddy
[...]

As you noted, I believe more problem is with my expression than my
logic.

Of course you believe that. You're deluded. When you say
things like

"I would say any branch of mathematics (topology etc) which desires to
model physical continuum and depends on the notion of "open and closed
intervals of continuum" needs clean up. Because by allowing those open
and close notions, we are modeling only descretum by assuming that it
is possible to strip off zero extent boundaries from their regions.

Why we can't strip off boundaries? because you can't subtract dogs
from kilometers. Regions are of one dimension higher than their
boundaries."

there is no problem with your expression - it's the "logic"
that's simply bizarre.

So, which specific things apear bizarre to you? Can I clarify it
further?

- venkat
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Delusions and occasional bleak truth
    ... Venkat Reddy wrote: ... model physical continuum and depends on the notion of "open and closed ... is possible to strip off zero extent boundaries from their regions. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Delusions and occasional bleak truth
    ... Today's Calvin & Hobbes comic has this final statement from Calvin: ... model physical continuum and depends on the notion of "open and closed ... is possible to strip off zero extent boundaries from their regions. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Delusions and occasional bleak truth
    ... model physical continuum and depends on the notion of "open and closed ... is possible to strip off zero extent boundaries from their regions. ... of zero extent sets, whose union is a non-zero extent set. ...
    (sci.math)