On 2/12/2013 3:47 PM, Virgil wrote: > In article > <13ead2a9-0acc-452f-99aa-c2cd81d02ae7@m4g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>, > WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > >> On 12 Feb., 18:13, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Feb 12, 2:12 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: >>> >>>> There is no line of the list that contains all FISs of d (because >>>> there are not all). >>> >>> Your claim is that there is a line of the list that contains >>> every FIS of d (there is no mention of all) >> >> But you seem to interpret some completeness into "every". >> Remember, beyond *every* FIS there are infinitely many FISs. > > But no FISs beyond *every* FIS. >>> >>> you also claim >>> >>> the potentially infinite sequence d is not equal to the >>> potentially infinite sequence given by a line of the list. >> >> The lines of the list are finite. >> 1 >> 12 >> 123 >> ... >> Or does that property disturb you?I use this model only because it is >> simpler to treat. >> >>> >>> Note that a potentially infinite sequence x is >>> equal to a potentially infinite sequence y iff >>> every FIS of x is a FIS of y and every FIS of >>> y is a FIS of x. No mention or need of completion. > > That does not hold when comparing an infinite sequences of finite > sequences of digits with an infinite sequence of digits. > > A FIS of a sequence of sequences is not the same as a FIS of a sequence > of individuals. at least not for sequences of more than one object. > > For WM's argument to be calid here one would have to have sequences of 2 > or more digits identical to single digits. >
