In article <344cd806-187a-4391-b626-7a0f591d7c9f@y7g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 7 Dez., 18:29, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Dec 7, 1:06 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > On 7 Dez., 15:35, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > You can easily see it by the sequence of sets of exponents > > > > > of the sequence a_k = 10^-1 + ... + 10^-k. > > > > > There no infinite set is contained. But every natural number is > > > > > contained. > > > > More Wolkenmuekenheim reasoning: > > > > Consider the sets b_k={k}. There is no set with two elements > > > > contained. But every natural number is contained. > > > > > You are trapped by silly analogie. > > > > Trapped is correct. However, your pronoun is wrong > > and in place of "silly" you want "trivial". > > I see, you have no arguments anymore.
As WM has been caught by an argument he is unable to fault, his only option it to try to bluff hi way out of it.
> But certainly you will continue to defend your broken system. > Incredible how set theory has perverted mathematics!
It may seem to WM to have perverted Wolkenmuekenheim, but we have a fair amount of evidence that Wolkenmuekenheim was already perverted far beyond any external power to pervert it further.
But set theory has proved to be a useful and powerful addition to the mathematic's tool box.
At least outside of Wolkenmuekenheim. > > Regards, WM --
