u r too bookish believing ever |
送交者: 空軍大院 2009月04月24日09:09:09 於 [教育學術] 發送悄悄話 |
回 答: that's not a definition 由 要飯花子 於 2009-04-24 08:53:49 |
ything sould be exactly like Euclid did! The definition is what one believes to be, no question should be asked for its proof or scope. it is just a starting point in a way...if the definition is wrong, the theorem should be wrong in an obvious way later. don't believe so, change the definition of point to "having no lines", see what will happen later in your proof.
|
|
|
|
實用資訊 | |
|
|
一周點擊熱帖 | 更多>> |
|
|
一周回復熱帖 |
|
歷史上的今天:回復熱帖 |
2007: | 蓋茨對清華與北大的評價zt | |
2007: | 清華大學講席教授制度回顧zt | |
2006: | 誠信缺失困擾學術殿堂 | |
2004: | 植物研究所更名的若干思考 | |