On Jan 29, 12:28 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 29 Jan., 12:02, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > To summarize > > > For every natural number, n, the antidiagonal,d, of a list L > > is not equal to the nth line of L > > > A statement WM has made. > > > A) For every natural number n, P(n) is true. > > implies > > B) There does not exist a natural number n such that P(n) is > > false. > > > A statement WM has made. > > > There does not exist a natural number n such that d is > > equal to the nth line of L > > > A statement WM disputes > > I do not dispute this statement (as I erroneously had said yesterday, > when being in a hurry). I dispute that this statement implies the > statement: > d is not in one of all lines of the infinite list L
It does, however, imply that d is not of the the lines of the infinite list L.
> and, hence, cannot > be used to argue that cardinality is increased. > (The reson is that "all" is maeningless here.) > > What about C1, C2, C3?