Sujet : Re: Cantor Diagonal Proof
De : Keith.S.Thompson+u (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Keith Thompson)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 11. Apr 2025, 22:26:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None to speak of
Message-ID : <87ecxyqtjj.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
wij <
wyniijj5@gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, 2025-04-11 at 04:21 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
You agree "f at c is not defined (handled) in limit", yet, on the other hand
ASSERTING 0.333... is 'exactly' 1/3 from limit? Are you nut?
As usual, you need to prove what you say. Or you are just showing yourself
another olcott, just blink belief, nothing else.
Keep the insults to yourself. Last warning.
>
I still think 'nut' is a common word, at least a terse word for people saying
one thing and doing the other (or a liar more appropriate?)
You just called me a liar.
*PLONK*
-- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.comvoid Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Re: Cantor Diagonal Proof
Re: Cantor Diagonal Proof