On 26 Jan., 23:32, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > Aside: Of course this nonsense shows already that set theory is such. > > A limit is the continuation of the finite into the infinite. But that > > is not used in my proof. > > I know of no such definition of any limit process.
That does not prove anything. >
> > > You are not well informed. Read my proof again (and again, if > > necessary, until you will have understood, if possible): In analysis > > you calculate the limit. This limit contains numbers or (in the > > reduced case of my proof) bits 0 and 1. The number of theses bits is > > the cardinality of the limit. > > Then, according to WM, lim_(n -> oo) 1/n must have infinitely many bits.
Of course, for instance if written as the seqeunce that here is abbreviated as 1 - 0.999... or as 0.000...
It can be considerable shortened by 0 similar to the limit of my sequence oo.