Complementary Associations Theory

Doron Shadmi

Hello Dear people,


In the attached address you can find A new approach for the definition of a NUMBER, which is based on the complementary
concept: http://www.geocities.com/complementa...y/CATpage.html

I'll appreciate your remarks and insights.

Thank you.


Yours,

Doron

The One

What do I think?
Nice pic, shame about the rest!

The One[!:)]

Doron Shadmi

Hi the one,
Please be more specific.

Yours,

Doron

agro

Dear Doron,

Let me tell you that your abstract is even bound with problems... Let's dissect it, shall we?

No problem here. Maybe you should add "suppose" and change the second assumption so it becomes:

suppose A and B are sets.

suppose q and p are real numbers.

Now here lies the first problem:

By saying "option 1", do you mean "case 1"?

Btw let me tell you that you didn't mention anywhere that p is not equal q, so we cannot say "then q is not equal to p".

Let me give you an example.

suppose q and p are real numbers.

Now, q and p can both be 7, can't they (because there are no restrictions). Which means if a set A contains p, then A contains q. That means....

q and p are members of A

Which is case 1. But they are not different! So we CANNOT conclude that

but then q is not equal to p

You should address this problem before we continue the rest. You MAY have a great and revolutionary idea (which, I'm so sorry to say that I doubt), but you need to present it in a stepwise logical manner.

Did you mean:

suppose q and p are real numbers, with p not equal q.

Please reply

Thank you