Re: first attempt at cycling through London


"John Hearns" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:45f94c12$0$8726$ed2619ec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
elyob wrote:

How do you know this? I'm interested to see the changes. Hopefully I
won't have to update my site much ...


I'm a member of a couple of LCC local groups. The LCC borough coordinators
were asked for any amendments/suggestions for the new update of the maps,
and put our emails to their lists.

Your site looks very useful - but does it cover only the Sheet 10 area?


I covered just some as they take a full day each, and I haven't got a spare
month at the moment. I've done central and south west. I also did maps 1 and
19.

Feel free to give me a hand ;)



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: infinity ...
    ... What we want is to see a mapping from *N to Pwhich maps some member ... Anything less is irrelevant to the validity of TO's alleged bijection ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity ...
    ... there can be no y such that it maps to the subset of all elements which do ... So, indeed, it IS a member of w. ... >>> Neither of those possibilities causes a contradiction. ... If y is not in S, then it is not part of the bijection. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Uncountability of the Rationals?
    ... Tony Orlow writes: ... then g maps to a member of N ... (This comment came out of the blue at breakfast.) ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity ...
    ... >> Tony Orlow wrote: ... >>> Oh yeah, the entire set, last element and all. ... What we want is to see a mapping from *N to Pwhich maps some member ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity ...
    ... > any natural which maps to the entire set of naturals. ... That doesn't matter. ... But that does not establish anything like a bijection ... >> where z is NOT a member of your original set S. You don't ...
    (sci.math)