"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
>
> Very good!
>
> In fact, so good I'll let you explain the rest of the statement of the
> Poincare Conjecture . . .
>
> ;-)
...
> > I have a vision of producing a "definition tree" for
> >the word homeomorphism, which I'll write as an outline:
> >
> >homeomorphism
> > bicontinuous
> > continuous
> > open set (undefined term)
> > inverse image
...
> > And I'm sure I left some stuff out.
> >
> > ---David
>
> -- Ronn! :)
>
> Who has his hands full on another list attempting to explain causality
> violation to laypeople . . .
No, I just do outlines. I'm getting to like the idea,
since it shows just how much work it is to really understand
theorems. And I'm carefully leaving out all of the logic, as
well.
---David
No, I won't define "sphere".
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
