TSE@PO.MISSOURI.EDU

View:

 Message: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Topic: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Author: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] Font: Proportional Font
 LISTSERV Archives TSE Home TSE March 2001

Subject:

Re: OFF TOPIC - Map coloring

From:

Date:

Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:01:09 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (184 lines)
 ```This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0094_01C0AB0D.A767DBE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Arwin: Didn't Kant maintain precisely the opposite? =20 Still trying to understrand Kant but can't Rick Seddon McIntosh, NM, USA     -----Original Message-----     From: Arwin van Arum <[log in to unmask]>     To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>     Date: Monday, March 12, 2001 3:52 PM     Subject: RE: OFF TOPIC - Map coloring    =20    =20     With which you only illustrate that a theoretical proof is only = better when a practical proof is impossible.     =20     A.         -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----         Van: [log in to unmask] = [mailto:[log in to unmask]]Namens [log in to unmask]         Verzonden: maandag 12 maart 2001 23:39         Aan: [log in to unmask]         Onderwerp: Re: OFF TOPIC - Map coloring        =20        =20         In a message dated 3/12/01 2:47:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,=20         [log in to unmask] writes:=20        =20        =20        =20             . Usually once the practical proof has been achieved, this = is stronger proof=20             than theoretical proof, because to be one-hundred percent = certain of a=20             theoretical proof you just have to be sure that the theory = will correctly=20             predict any given situation that lies within its domain, and = the least=20             doubtful way of doing so is to test it with every possible = situation within=20             its domain.=20            =20        =20        =20         It seems to me a mathematician would disagree with your = definition of proof,=20         and I'm inclined to agree with the mathematical assumption that = the=20         theoretical proof is stronger, which is precisely why we learned = to do all=20         those geometrical proofs in high school. With a geometrical = proof in hand=20         that certain relationships can be found in a right angle = triangle, one no=20         longer needs to check every right angle triangle in the universe = to see if it=20         works every time.=20        =20         pat=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0094_01C0AB0D.A767DBE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Arwin:

Didn't Kant maintain precisely the opposite? =20

Still trying to understrand Kant but = can't
Rick Seddon
McIntosh, NM, USA

-----Original = Message-----
= Date:=20     Monday, March 12, 2001 3:52 PM
Subject: RE: OFF TOPIC = - Map=20     coloring

With which you only illustrate that a = theoretical=20     proof is only better when a practical proof is=20     impossible.

A.

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Verzonden: maandag 12 maart 2001 =         23:39
Onderwerp: = Re: OFF=20         TOPIC - Map coloring

In a message dated 3/12/01 2:47:08 PM Eastern = Standard=20         Time,

. Usually once the practical proof has been = achieved,=20             this is stronger proof
than theoretical proof, because = to be=20             one-hundred percent certain of a
theoretical proof you = just have=20             to be sure that the theory will correctly
predict any = given=20             situation that lies within its domain, and the least =
doubtful=20             way of doing so is to test it with every possible situation = within=20
its domain.

It seems to=20         me a mathematician would disagree with your definition of proof, =
and=20         I'm inclined to agree with the mathematical assumption that the=20
theoretical proof is stronger, which is precisely why we = learned to=20         do all
those geometrical proofs in high school. With a = geometrical=20         proof in hand
that certain relationships can be found in a = right=20         angle triangle, one no
longer needs to check every right = angle=20         triangle in the universe to see if it
works every time. =

pat=20
------=_NextPart_000_0094_01C0AB0D.A767DBE0-- ```