Revision as of 06:04, 14 September 2018 edit Trovatore (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 39,117 edits m →"Disagreement" on constructivity: oops, wrong spot ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:06, 14 September 2018 edit undo Trovatore (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 39,117 edits →"Disagreement" on constructivity: so much the better Next edit →
Line 235: So Cantor does give a method of constructing transcendental numbers. By the way, Kac and Ulam present the same non-constructive proof that Stewart uses. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:RJGray\|RJGray]] ([[User talk:RJGray#top\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/RJGray\|contribs]]) 01:56, 14 September 2018 (UTC)</small> ::OK, well, I haven't read Stewart's article; I don't know exactly what Stewart claims. I was making an inference based on what the citation said. ::If Stewart does not claim that Cantor didn't find a particular transcendental, then there's even less support for the claim of "disagreement". --[[User:Trovatore\|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore\|talk]]) 06:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Cantor's first set theory article: Difference between revisions