tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post115092762818413045..comments2014-06-25T07:05:59.204-07:00Comments on A Neighborhood of Infinity: How to Divide by ThreeDan Piponihttps://plus.google.com/107913314994758123748noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-1151795788538596142006-07-01T16:16:00.000-07:002006-07-01T16:16:00.000-07:00That paper does go on a bit, doesn't it? I'm vague...That paper does go on a bit, doesn't it? I'm vaguely interested in the result, but I really can't be bothered to dig through the waffle to hunt down the actual bits where they prove things... :)David R. MacIverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12893796777558636623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-1150997240160043762006-06-22T10:27:00.000-07:002006-06-22T10:27:00.000-07:00Actually, it's true for any finite set, not just 3...Actually, it's true for any finite set, not just 3. But 2 is easier and the method needs to be varied a bit for larger finite sets.sigfpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08096190433222340957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11295132.post-1150982174223703252006-06-22T06:16:00.000-07:002006-06-22T06:16:00.000-07:00I seem to recall reading on the Foundations of Mat...I seem to recall reading on the Foundations of Mathematics e-mail list that this is possible for three but not for two, or something equally crazy. (Of course, it's trivial as long as at least one of A and B is known to be finite.)Kennyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12226268498253877151noreply@blogger.com