>>>> I don't know him; does he argue that 2+2=4 can be false? If so,
>>>> I like to see the argument; it would be fascinating.
>>> Well, in base 3, the argument wouldn't be false, it would be
>>> nonsensical.
>> But it isn't _in_ base three, any more than your above sentence is
>> in German.
>
> I'm not sure that this aids Joanna's point, but on a more elementary
> level (that is to say i was taught this in elementary school) the
> truth of 2+2=4 is conditioned on the assumption of the density of
> real numbers. Otherwise 2+2=4 is not true by definition. i.e., if 2
> (as in "2 percent of the vote") stands for all values between more
> than 1.5 and less than 2.5, then 2+2=4 will often be false.
>
> john mage
>
>
> I remember... It was 3rd grade. We did "times tables" with our
> pretzels and milk.
>
> Then we would work with set theory and number lines.
Hi Leigh! Didn't realize we went to the same elementary school.
It wasn't until high school that i realized that it was in fact safe to assume that real numbers (like the _totally_ gorgeous ones) were invariably dense.
john mage