Re: #547 is Larry a time traveler? ; new textbook: Mathematical Physics (AP-adic Primer)

<plutonium.archimedes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:e6c0d43e-e82d-44aa-bcee-0905d9674f6c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Larry Hammick wrote:
> (snipped)
>> in Archie's bonnet. I remarked here at sci.math that there are several
>> differences between Euclid's proof of IX.20
>> http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookIX/propIX20.html
>> and the modern version, although the basic ideas are same and the proof

>> is
>> still attributed to Euclid. In particular,
>>
>
> Not true. Apparently you arrived at the sci.math in 2002.

Sounds about right.

>
> I had started discussing the flaw of Euclid's IP in 1993-1994 sci.math
>
> witness:
>
> Sun, 20FEB1994, 21:05:13 GMT sci.math
> INCONSISTENT PEANO AXIOMS AND MATH PROFESSORS
> Lines: 36
> Sender: k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Karl Heuer)

Okay, but were you looking at Euclid himself, or at Hardy and the numerous

other writers who speak of "the set of all primes" and "Euclid's proof"? 
Anyhow, it's a trivial quibble.