On 10/11/2019 12:18 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
I am saying that SINCE there is no unique representation, it's a fallacy to take, say one representation, and assert that the components in one representation, simultaneously represent the wf.
But that's an invalid inference. If there is no unique representation, then there is more than one representation. Some of those consist of a linear composition of components. You seem to infer that because there is no unique representation then representations in terms of components is wrong...but those two things are not only consistent, they are logically equivalent; each one implies the other.
Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/900848b4-af8f-00dd-6bec-df711d11b7c9%40verizon.net.
