|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:42:02 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>In article <1157005534.118632.225770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> imaginatorium@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> Virgil wrote:
>> > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:35:05 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > >In article <0knbf2pgrqbgnd0767qelqjfkau8ustnic@xxxxxxx>,
>> > > > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:56:35 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > >> >In article <31h9f2lhb5im2pt9gargnhfmnuv132rkbn@xxxxxxx>,
>> > > >> > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > >> >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:52:56 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> On 28 Aug 2006 15:09:26 -0700, "MoeBlee" <jazzmobe@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > > >> >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >Lester Zick wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >Lester Zick wrote:
>> > > >> >> >> >> >> >Definitions are not subject to "proof".
>>
>> Gosh. Snip.
>>
>> > What does Zick find ambiguous in "Let 'squircle' mean " a square
>> > circle' "?
>> > The only word in it of more than one syllable is "squircle".
>>
>> "Circle" seems to have two syllables to me.
>>
>> Brian Chandler
>> http://imaginatorium.org
>
>I'll allow for one and a half.
Certainly more than you allow for the truth of axioms and definitions
in modern math.
~v~~
|
|