Adriana Xenides Dead
in [Math]
|
From: Pol Lux on 11 Jun 2010 23:28 On Jun 7, 6:35 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote > > > > > > > "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> writes: > > >> "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote > >>> "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> writes: > > >>>>>> Given a set of labeled boxes containing numbers inside them, > >>>>>> can you possibly find a box containing all the label numbers of boxes > >>>>>> that don't contain their own label number? > > >>>> Have a go mate! > > >>> The answer is no, near as I can figure. > > >>> Now, if you also knew that, for each set of numbers, there is a box > >>> containing that set, then you'd have a paradox. Near as I can figure, > >>> you *don't* know that. > > >>> In set theory, on the other hand, we *do* know the analogous claim. > > >> So, no box ever containing the numbers of boxes not containing their own numbers > >> means higher infinities exist? > > > *Given* that every set of numbers is contained in some box, I guess > > so. > > > But I don't see how this analogy is supposed to make Cantor's theorem > > appear dubious. > > So, as many have put it, the holy grail of mathematics, the infinite paradise is based on > no box containing the numbers of boxes that don't contain their own number? > > Herc This thread is kind of like lunatics talking to each other. Fun grade: 4/10.
From: |-|ercules on 12 Jun 2010 00:02 "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote > "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> writes: > >> "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote >>> Tim Little <tim(a)little-possums.net> writes: >>> >>>> On 2010-06-10, |-|ercules <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> I have little time for you as you keep snipping the points you >>>>> refute then repeating your exact same error. >>>> >>>> I'm not surprised that you have little time for me. By interacting >>>> with me you run the risk of having to admit your errors to >>>> yourself, and that would be abhorrent to you. >>> Oh, please. >>> >>> This is a man who thinks that he's Truman, Adam, and maybe God. He >>> thinks that he has special psychic powers, that some poor woman who >>> is frightened by him is his perfect mate, that names indicate >>> essence and that he is being tortured by sonic devices. >>> >>> No matter how perfect your argument, you won't force a person like >>> this to admit that he's mistaken. >>> >> >> Being Adam is a longshot, but all the other claims fall into place >> given that, so essentially you are dismissing Adam and Eve could ever >> evolve at some point, unsubstantiated. > > Er, right. That's what I'm dismissing. > >> Anyway a $50,000 prize skeptic company looks like they're going to >> give me a shot, so stay tuned, the mass ignorance won't last much >> longer. > > Well, you can tell them that you picked this year's Stanley Cup winner, > when there were eight teams in contention. That's probably not worth > $50,000, but at least a buck or two. > Wow! I wasn't sure I could predict football games but there you go! "|-|ercules" <milliondollarfraud*gmail.com> writes: >> Nonetheless, will you have a go at the Stanley Cup winner or not? > > > Blackhawks How did you arrive at that answer? -- Jesse F. Hughes 2009-10 - Chicago Blackhawks What is it with this week? I won my defamation case for $250,000. A skeptic company will show my powers to the world. My football prediction worked. I finally disproved Cantor (wait for the formalization in ZFC) And yet I slept 3 nights in my car eating bread and smelling quite bad! Herc
From: Tim Little on 12 Jun 2010 00:11 On 2010-06-12, |-|ercules <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > What is it with this week? I won my defamation case for $250,000. Oh really? Where was it heard and when? > I finally disproved Cantor (wait for the formalization in ZFC) I won't be holding my breath for that, as first you would have to learn ZFC. - Tim
From: Pollux on 11 Jun 2010 20:54 > Oh really? Where was it heard and when? > > > > I finally disproved Cantor (wait for the > formalization in ZFC) Tears of joy are streaming down my cheeks! Allelujah! Cantor finally disproved! The greatest day of my life (irony - I have to put that disclaimer, because it got really scary when some posters started thinking my comments were not ironic!!!)
From: Jesse F. Hughes on 12 Jun 2010 00:57
"|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com> writes: >> Well, you can tell them that you picked this year's Stanley Cup winner, >> when there were eight teams in contention. That's probably not worth >> $50,000, but at least a buck or two. >> > > > Wow! I wasn't sure I could predict football games but there you go! Er, ice hockey. -- Jesse F. Hughes "Part of the problem here, Peter, is that you are an idiot." -- Daryl McCullough gives a diagnosis |