FOM: surgery; Pais/Gonshor confusion
Stephen G Simpson
simpson at math.psu.edu
Tue Jun 8 19:12:35 EDT 1999
John Pais 08 Jun 1999 12:28:33 complains about my alleged ``posting
> The surgery on and Frankensteinian reassembly of my original
> posting ... quotes me as quoting Harry Gonshor as claiming to
> introduce the surreal numbers as a new structure.
But you *did* quote Gonshor as claiming that. In your posting of 24
May 1999 18:50:34, you quoted Gonshor's book at length, including
``... more important than obtaining a new way of building up a
familiar set such as the real numbers, is the enrichment of
mathematics by the inclusion of a new structure with interesting
Didn't you? Please acknowledge that these words came from Gonshor.
You need to acknowledge this, otherwise people may believe you when
you say I manufactured these words and attributed them to Gonshor.
> Steve contracts my original posting in such a way as to destroy the
> context and main import of my original question, and to apparently
> answer one he liked better.
It's true that I didn't like your original question and therefore
didn't answer it directly. Instead, I answered your original question
indirectly, by directly answering another question that I liked
better. (See my posting of 7 Jun 1999 14:45:01.) However, that
doesn't mean that I destroyed the context or import of your original
question. The full context is still available in the FOM archives.
I think you are attributing too much importance to your own question,
and to your criticism of my posting style. I am still waiting for you
to contribute something of value regarding some serious f.o.m. issue.
More information about the FOM