Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

6
  • +1 " Without transitivity I fail to see how equality has retains its usual meaning. "
    – J D
    Commented Jun 29 at 17:33
  • While this is an interesting suggestion, it isn't relevant to the question, which is motivated by the inconsistent notion of an "arbitrary constant" that is equal to everything. Commented Jun 29 at 17:34
  • @DavidGudeman ah, ok -- I think I got lost a bit there in the formalism.
    – Annika
    Commented Jun 29 at 17:47
  • 1
    @Annika You give an interesting example from biology. But it does not show that "equality" violates transitivity - of course not. It shows that the relation "mating with fertile offspring" violates transitivity. There are many similar, non-transitive relations, e.g., "is friend of" or "to be acquainted with so.".
    – Jo Wehler
    Commented Jun 29 at 17:53
  • 5
    I don't recommend putting any effort into understanding his post. From experience, I can tell you that such effort will not be rewarded. Still, this is a very good answer to a different question; it's a shame that it won't get you the upvotes you deserve. Commented Jun 29 at 18:08