does this sound dumb?

Post Reply New Topic

Hello. For 10.14 in the solution, why don't you have to show that there is no x for 2 in R - {2}? Because in surjection, you've showed that there is no y for 1 from R - {1}. There is no x for 2. Thanks.

someone of you know that i like the professor i emailed this to. you don't need to understand the question. what i think dumb is this: There is no x for 2. Thanks.

actually it might be funny. this has been bothering me a lot. i have a hard time concentrating on other things because of this.

Ummm... I think x should be allowed a 2, it deserves it. I will now award x a 2. There you go, good x.

(And yes I am completely incapable of understanding that question.)