The Definition of Points
in [Math]
|
Prev: Guide to presenting Lemma, Theorems and Definitions
Next: Density of the set of all zeroes of a function with givenproperties
From: Lester Zick on 1 Apr 2007 21:05 On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 21:14:27 -0500, Tony Orlow <tony(a)lightlink.com> wrote: >>> Choose true or false above, and I guarantee you'll see it's the relation OR. >> >> Of course it is, Tony. I just tried to slip one over on you. OR Brian >> OR Virgil OR Stephen OR PD OR David Or Mikey Or someone else >> without saying so. >> >> ~v~~ > >I think you mean AND. ;) Doesn't really matter. They're all the same. ~v~~
From: Lester Zick on 1 Apr 2007 21:07 On 31 Mar 2007 22:36:51 -0700, "Brian Chandler" <imaginatorium(a)despammed.com> wrote: >> Did you learn that trick from Lester? > >Don't think so. You think Lester is acting? I'd be curious to know what you think I'm doing, Brian. ~v~~
From: Lester Zick on 1 Apr 2007 21:10 On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:51:49 -0500, Tony Orlow <tony(a)lightlink.com> wrote: >A logical statement can be classified as true or false? True or false? You show me the demonstration of your answer, Tony, because it's your question and your claim not mine. ~v~~
From: Lester Zick on 1 Apr 2007 21:12 On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:58:31 -0500, Tony Orlow <tony(a)lightlink.com> wrote: >How many arguments do true() and false() take? Zero? (sigh) >Well, there they are. Zero-place operators for your dining pleasure. Or negative place operators, or imaginary place operators, or maybe even infinite and infinitesimal operators. I'd say the field's pretty wide open when all you're doing is guessing and making assumptions of truth. Pretty much whatever you'd want I expect.Don't let me stop you. ~v~~
From: Lester Zick on 1 Apr 2007 21:14
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 21:03:35 -0500, Tony Orlow <tony(a)lightlink.com> wrote: >>> Not being universally self-contradictory does not make a statement true. >>> It just leaves open the possibility... >> >> No of course it doesn't, Tony. Fact is it leaves open no possibility >> whatsoever because every time I ask you what possibility it leaves >> open you say none whatsoever per say. >> >> ~v~~ > >That's pro se, if you don't mind... No it's per say, Tony, because I have yet to see you demonstrate the truth of anything you've had to say per se. ~v~~ |