# Re: Just a question

```Hi Bruno,

```
It is obvious to anyone that understand the notion of "numbers" because this notion of "bigger than" or greater than is enshrined in the notion of the succession of numbers. My question involves situations that can not be faithfully described only using a number. Are all relations strictly Archimedean?

```
http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Archimedean_property
http://www.cooldictionary.com/words/Archimedean-group.wikipedia

Stephen

```
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruno Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
```To: "Everything-List List" <everything-list@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 11:21 AM
Subject: Just a question

```
```

Does everyone agree with the following proposition:

For all number x,  if x is bigger than 2 then x is bigger than 1.

```
(by "bigger" I mean strictly bigger: 17 is strictly bigger than 16, but not strictly bigger than 17).
```
```
It would help me to explain some point to non logicians if you tell me in case you believe the proposition above is false.
```
I can put it in another way, like:

```
Whatever the number someone can choose, if that number is bigger than
```          2 then it will be bigger than 1.

Is it obvious?

Thanks,

Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

```
```
```