Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:51:33 -0500
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 22:42:20 +0000, Angus Rodgers
<twirlip@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:56:17 -0500, quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Let's talk math, not analyze your twisted mindset.
Where do you suggest I get my twisted mindset analysed, then?
Who cares.
... *** off and stop annoying me, if you have nothing constructive
(in any sense of the word) to contribute.
But I see you conveniently ignored (and snipped) the math challenge in
my prior reply...
Here it is again:
How about posting a simple, complete proof, as short as possible,
containing the "unquantified" statement "x >= 1", which you think
illustrates the impossibility of equating truth with provability.
quasi
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- References:
- The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Prev by Date: Re: a question in law of large numbers
- Next by Date: Re: binary expansion of a random variable
- Previous by thread: Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Next by thread: Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Index(es):