SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 4:
Line 4: + + + + + +
→reversion of July 9: new section
:: Wow, that is an amazing result. I was going to suggest 1st, 2nd, and 3rd bases as a counterexample, but it's clear that a plane parallel to the field bisects them. Raise 2nd base, and one simply rotates the plane, I suppose.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:52, 9 November 2009 (EST)
:: Wow, that is an amazing result. I was going to suggest 1st, 2nd, and 3rd bases as a counterexample, but it's clear that a plane parallel to the field bisects them. Raise 2nd base, and one simply rotates the plane, I suppose.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:52, 9 November 2009 (EST)
== reversion of July 9 ==
I have reverted some foolishness. If you thought the Earth/Mars/Jupiter analogy was useless, why didn't you simply remove it, and perhaps replace it with a better one, rather than sticking in the word "no"? Also, the presence of other items, like pickles, has absolutely nothing to do with the theorem. It applies to any Lebesgue-measurable sets, even those that overlap, and has nothing to do with other sets, like pickles, in the vicinity.
I invite you, ELWisty, to explain your actions here. And I invite sysops to review same and decide what to do. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 18:55, 9 July 2011 (EDT)