On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> You mean that you made many attempts to find a blunder, but we were more > than three to show you that in each case, you were confusing 1-views and > 3-views. > That was your one and only retort in our debate, no explanation just a repeat of the mantra, you really should get a rubber stamp made of "you're confusing 1-views and 3-views". And yet I would humbly submit that there is not a single person on planet Earth who "confuses the 1-view from the 3-view"; or at least nobody this side of a looney bin. > >> a proof is built on the foundations of previous steps therefor it would > be idiotic to keep reading a proof, any proof, after a mistake has been > found. > > > This means you don't suspect errors in the sequel. Nice. > I have no idea if you made additional errors and I don't care, it doesn't matter how strong the walls of a skyscraper are if it's built on top of a mound of jello it's going to come crashing down. After an error has been made in a proof everything that follows is just gibberish. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
