Sujet : Re: The set of necessary FISONs
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 25. Feb 2025, 10:54:07
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <b0d0c2648f79936c72c8e2927f4e32a2b06a1b3e@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:49:34 +0100 schrieb WM:
On 24.02.2025 19:25, Jim Burns wrote:
On 2/24/2025 12:10 PM, WM wrote:
In the present framework,
you (WM) confuse a claim about each FISON in {F} with a claim about
{F}.
I never talked about {F}.
Yes you do talk about removing {F}.
{1,2}\{1,{2}} = {2}
Only such nonsense available?
I'll grant you that it's trivial.
You (WM) have made it necessary to cover this.
-- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.