On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 4:31:09 AM UTC-4, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> So Gabriel claims there are no valid real numbers. Gabriel, I am taking you up on it.
>
> To show this statement to be true you have to find an internal inconsistency. The fact it doesn't align with your preferred system does in anyway make them invalid. They are only incompatible with your system them.
>
> So The three champions are
> Eudoxus: https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0405454.pdf
> Dedikind: https://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/~pjaming/M1/exposes/MA1a.pdf
> Cauchy: https://www.math.wustl.edu/~kumar/courses/310-2009/peano.pdf
>
> Find one internal inconsistency, that is a statement that is both true and false and provably so.
>
> If you cannot, you cannot claim they are invalid, you can at most say incompatible with your ideas.

John Gabriel (aka "I am super rectum") the self-styled "Greatest Mathematician Ever," has no interest or ability in proving anything. He refuses to identify the underlying assumptions of his goofy little system--his axioms, if they even exist. Doing so would only expose him to more ridicule and he knows it. Like any con man, he much prefers ambiguity to precision of language.

Dan

On Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 5:53:06 AM UTC+10, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 4:31:09 AM UTC-4, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > So Gabriel claims there are no valid real numbers. Gabriel, I am taking you up on it.
> >
> > To show this statement to be true you have to find an internal inconsistency. The fact it doesn't align with your preferred system does in anyway make them invalid. They are only incompatible with your system them.
> >
> > So The three champions are
> > Eudoxus: https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0405454.pdf
> > Dedikind: https://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/~pjaming/M1/exposes/MA1a.pdf
> > Cauchy: https://www.math.wustl.edu/~kumar/courses/310-2009/peano.pdf
> >
> > Find one internal inconsistency, that is a statement that is both true and false and provably so.
> >
> > If you cannot, you cannot claim they are invalid, you can at most say incompatible with your ideas.
> John Gabriel (aka "I am super rectum") the self-styled "Greatest Mathematician Ever," has no interest or ability in proving anything. He refuses to identify the underlying assumptions of his goofy little system--his axioms, if they even exist. Doing so would only expose him to more ridicule and he knows it. Like any con man, he much prefers ambiguity to precision of language.
>

ZELOS and DAN are the greatest CON MEN and Talent Prohibition Fartists on the WEB!

DC-POOF2.SHIT - PROOF P *ANY* (N) LIST OF *FINITE* SIZE N .... conclusion : SUPER INFINITIEEEEES

On Friday, June 11, 2021 at 7:18:09 AM UTC-4, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 5:53:06 AM UTC+10, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 4:31:09 AM UTC-4, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > So Gabriel claims there are no valid real numbers. Gabriel, I am taking you up on it.
> > >
> > > To show this statement to be true you have to find an internal inconsistency. The fact it doesn't align with your preferred system does in anyway make them invalid. They are only incompatible with your system them.
> > >
> > > So The three champions are
> > > Eudoxus: https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0405454.pdf
> > > Dedikind: https://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/~pjaming/M1/exposes/MA1a.pdf
> > > Cauchy: https://www.math.wustl.edu/~kumar/courses/310-2009/peano.pdf
> > >
> > > Find one internal inconsistency, that is a statement that is both true and false and provably so.
> > >
> > > If you cannot, you cannot claim they are invalid, you can at most say incompatible with your ideas.
> > John Gabriel (aka "I am super rectum") the self-styled "Greatest Mathematician Ever," has no interest or ability in proving anything. He refuses to identify the underlying assumptions of his goofy little system--his axioms, if they even exist. Doing so would only expose him to more ridicule and he knows it. Like any con man, he much prefers ambiguity to precision of language.
> >
>
>
> ZELOS and DAN are the greatest CON MEN and Talent Prohibition Fartists on the WEB!
>
> DC-POOF2.SHIT - PROOF P *ANY* (N) LIST OF *FINITE* SIZE N .... conclusion : SUPER INFINITIEEEEES

I don't think it is quite like that. I think he really does practice mathematics sincerely. Otherwise he wouldn't go to such great troubles as in his youtube videos. True mathematicians are guilty of great descents as well as great ascents; Newton decoded his bible quite seriously. Well, Newton was a thief, you say; well, ideas are like that I'd say, and how one goes about rationalizing the adoption of another man's idea in one's own head without making it your own idea is a very troublesome thing. As students work within academia; paying their professors to apply deadlines and mazes for their potential failure... none of that goes on here on USENET. What we see here is a clean exposition of the human state. We are fragile beings. Our ideas are built on other men's ideas... some of which are dubious... so what does that make our ideas???

The whole state of affairs is secured at the top by a system of money making journals whose compilers are the ultimate censors of truth... right? This is the standard mathematician's idea of compiler level integrity.

On Friday, 11 June 2021 at 07:18:09 UTC-4, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 5:53:06 AM UTC+10, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 4:31:09 AM UTC-4, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > So Gabriel claims there are no valid real numbers. Gabriel, I am taking you up on it.
> > >
> > > To show this statement to be true you have to find an internal inconsistency. The fact it doesn't align with your preferred system does in anyway make them invalid. They are only incompatible with your system them.
> > >
> > > So The three champions are
> > > Eudoxus: https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0405454.pdf
> > > Dedikind: https://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/~pjaming/M1/exposes/MA1a.pdf
> > > Cauchy: https://www.math.wustl.edu/~kumar/courses/310-2009/peano.pdf
> > >
> > > Find one internal inconsistency, that is a statement that is both true and false and provably so.
> > >
> > > If you cannot, you cannot claim they are invalid, you can at most say incompatible with your ideas.
> > John Gabriel (aka "I am super rectum") the self-styled "Greatest Mathematician Ever," has no interest or ability in proving anything. He refuses to identify the underlying assumptions of his goofy little system--his axioms, if they even exist. Doing so would only expose him to more ridicule and he knows it. Like any con man, he much prefers ambiguity to precision of language.
> >
>
>
> ZELOS and DAN are the greatest CON MEN and Talent Prohibition Fartists on the WEB!

To be called CON MEN, they first need to have a certain level of intelligence, but as you correctly noted, they are both idiots. :)

They con no one but themselves and as the saying goes for them: "Ignorance is bliss."

>
> DC-POOF2.SHIT - PROOF P *ANY* (N) LIST OF *FINITE* SIZE N .... conclusion : SUPER INFINITIEEEEES

If ever there was a piece of crap software, ... LMAO.