"Virgil" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:virgil-A641AB.firstname.lastname@example.org... > In article <email@example.com>, > "LudovicoVan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> "Virgil" <email@example.com> wrote in message >> news:virgil-D14BBC.firstname.lastname@example.org... >> >> > So if you still claim that some naturals remain in the vase, NAME ONE! >> >> I have proved that the limit set is countable: disprove it if you can. > > The empty set, which is t the proper value at t = 0, is certainly > countable.
>> I have shown, in number-theoretic terms (or, simply, with ordinals), that >> what is left is non-standard labels, if a look into the vase *at* step w >> is >> what you are after (and "when" exactly non-standard labels start entering >> the vase, etc.). >> >> I have already argued how your "every ball gets eventually removed" is >> just >> a paralogism, so that the Ross-Littlewood "paradox" is indeed about a >> misunderstanding "at infinity". > > You have argued a great deal of nonsense, none of which is relevant to > the problem as originally presented.