From: Jesse F. Hughes on
stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes says...
>
>>It is *amazing* how many stories you tell that involve someone else
>>complimenting and admiring you!
>
> Hey, there are people who admire me, too. But they prefer to remain
> anonymous.

I can understand that.

--
Jesse F. Hughes
"And a journal can beg me for the right to publish it [...] because
I'd rather see it in "People" magazine [...]"
--James Harris on his simple proof of Fermat's last theorem
From: Frederick Williams on
Frederick Williams wrote:
>
> "Jesse F. Hughes" wrote:
> >
> > Charlie-Boo <shymathguy(a)gmail.com> writes:
>
> > >
> > > Ask Gerald Sax who kept correcting him during his Mathematical Logic
> > > [...]
> > >
> >
> > It is *amazing* how many stories you tell that involve someone else
> > complimenting and admiring you! You know what? This makes me wish I
> > was more like you!
> >
> > You must be the best person in all Cambridge!
>
> Even I know that Sacks is spelt Sacks and I've never met him.
>
> (I think his friends call him Ger..)

I'm sure I typed "I think his friends call him Gerry".

--
I can't go on, I'll go on.
From: Jesse F. Hughes on
Frederick Williams <frederick.williams2(a)tesco.net> writes:

> Frederick Williams wrote:
>>
>> "Jesse F. Hughes" wrote:
>> >
>> > Charlie-Boo <shymathguy(a)gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > >
>> > > Ask Gerald Sax who kept correcting him during his Mathematical Logic
>> > > [...]
>> > >
>> >
>> > It is *amazing* how many stories you tell that involve someone else
>> > complimenting and admiring you! You know what? This makes me wish I
>> > was more like you!
>> >
>> > You must be the best person in all Cambridge!
>>
>> Even I know that Sacks is spelt Sacks and I've never met him.
>>
>> (I think his friends call him Ger..)
>
> I'm sure I typed "I think his friends call him Gerry".

Well, up to regexp matching, anyway.

--
Jesse F. Hughes
"And hey, if you're moping and miserable because mathematics tests you,
then maybe, if you think you're a mathematician, you might want to try
a different field." -- Another James S. Harris self-diagnosis.
From: Daryl McCullough on
In article <87r5lhjecr.fsf(a)phiwumbda.org>, Jesse F. Hughes says...
>
>stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) writes:
>
>> Jesse F. Hughes says...
>>
>>>It is *amazing* how many stories you tell that involve someone else
>>>complimenting and admiring you!
>>
>> Hey, there are people who admire me, too. But they prefer to remain
>> anonymous.
>
>I can understand that.

Thanks, I needed that.

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

From: herbzet on


Charlie-Boo wrote:

> Long ago I
> pointed out that the problem is that equality is more general than
> that. Any two things are equal at some level of abstraction and
> above, and not equal at all lower levels.

Hey -- great minds think alike!
See the corollary to herbzet's axiom at, e.g.,

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.logic/msg/bcd3720316b10c27? :

"> herbzet's axiom:

> Things are different only insofar as they are different, and no farther.

> Corollary:

> At a sufficient level of abstraction, any two things are the same thing."


These are VERY IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES: Things are as alike (or unalike!)
/precisely as far as is necessary/ to support the argument of any usenet
sore-head at any particular moment of an online argument.

***

Interestingly, at the above link Jones is discussing /the very problem
of this thread/ ... the addition of units!

">> A problem of addition can be summarised thus

>> 1) To be countable, elements must be alike.
>> 2) Elements that are indistinguishable cannot be counted."

etc., etc.!

Plus �a change, eh?
(herbzet's axiom in French)

--
hz