11

Overview Versions Help

Here you can see all page revisions and compare the changes have been made in each revision. Left column shows the page title and transcription in the selected revision, right column shows what have been changed. Unchanged text is highlighted in white, deleted text is ~~highlighted in red~~, and inserted text is highlighted in green color.

3 revisions	Lilith27 at May 03, 2020 03:06 AM	Compared with
May 03, 2020 Lilith27 Jul 22, 2019 agerdom May 31, 2013 Ben W. Brumfield	11 18 and simply leave a triplet of graphs and a pair of graphs. The graph will then become, let us say, this: [encode formula or diagram in LaTeX ??] On testing this by the rule given in the last lecture, we find that the graph is perfectly possible, as it stands, but that it will cease to be possible if more than one of the triplet p, q, r, are true or if more than one of the pair m, n are true, as is obvious on inspection. This suggests that the absurdity of the first graph is due, not to the relation of the identity, but to the fact	11 18 ~~and simply~~ leave a triplet of graphs and a pair of graphs. ~~We sha~~ The graph [min then I ??] become, let us say, this: [encode formula or diagram in LaTeX ??] On testing this by the rule given in the [last ??] lecture, we find that the graph is perfectly possible, as it stands, but that it will cease to be possible if more than one of the triplets p, q, r, are true or if more than one of the pair m, n are true, as is obvious on inspection. This suggests that the absurdity of the [first ??] graph is [due ??], not to the relation of the identity, but to the [fact ??]

11

3 revisions

11

11