In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 12 Feb., 09:34, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 12, 9:22 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > On 11 Feb., 22:47, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> You do > > > not see a contradiction in concluding > > > > both > > > > > > everything that is in some line > > > > of the list is in one line of the list. > > > > > > and > > > > > > there does not exist a natural number m > > > > such that the potentially infinite sequence > > > > d is equal to the potentially infinite > > > > sequence given by the mth line. > > > > > Why do you distract the attention of the reader? > > > Of course I see a contradiction. > > > > And unless you retract one or the other side, > > you will continue to assert a contradiction. > > Why are you lying?
WH is telling it like it is though WM cannot see it!
> You know that I would be asserting a contradiction if and only if the > premise was correct.
How can he "know" what is not so? Tell us how YOU do it, WM.
> Premise: The infinite sequence d can be somewhere. > Conclusion: The infinite sequence d is in the list and is not in the > list.
Only in Wolkenmuekenheim. Outside Wolkenmuekenheim an infinite sequence of digits is NOT a member of any list of only finite sequences of digits.
at least unless Wm is imagining those infinitely many finite sequnces to be concatenated, and even then most infinite lists will not be included anywhere within any such concatenation. > > Every mathematician with some basic eduction in logic would know what > to conclude.
And will conclude that WM is wrong!
> And I am sure, you also know it. Therefore I accuse you > of lying, namely saying the untruth when knowíng the truth.
The thing is that your "truth" is only valid in a dark place than none of us has the power to enter, and you apparently do not have the power to come out of that place into the light. --