On 13 Okt., 15:29, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So we are agreed that you can have a finished infinity > of symbols that contains a symbol for every natural number but does > not contain the symbol oo. (note that this finished infinity > does not have a largest element).
Of course, if there are no other arguments contradicting it. > > The first column contains every natural number > but does not contain oo, and the diagonal contains every natural > number but does not contain oo, They are identical.
And here is the argument contradicting it: The third side must also contain every natural number, but does not.
Why can't it: By 1/9 being not in the well-known list.
Why must it? 1) By 120°-symmetry. 2) By identity of limits of identical sequences.
Virgil even tried to use a counter-argument to super-tasking as a "proof" against this result. That means, the limit n-->oo meanwhile must be understood as super-tasking. Do you agree? --- Every concluding from the finite must be forbidden. Best would be to forbid every calculating in the finite.
