In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 14 Feb., 23:15, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > > > > That for every finite line d is longer than that line > > > > > You think that d in actually infinite. > > > > All I said was that it is longer than any finite line. > > > It *is* any finite line".
If it is "any finite line" it would have to be of more than one length, both of length 1 and of length 2 and of length 3, and d=so on.
> Actual infinity requires the belief that any > finite line is more than any finite line.
Actual infiniteness of d's line length only requires that foe any finite line, d is longer than that finite line, which is the case everywhere outside of Wolkenmuekenheim .
> That's what I call > matheology.
Then what you call matheology rules mathematics! > > > > > If you claim otherwise you are claiming it to be no longer than some > > finite line, which makes it also a finite line. > > It is as long as you can find a natural number to name its lenght.
At last that long and longer yet. > > > > > And d must be longer than any n one chooses, or that one CAN choose, as > > otherwise it is finite. > > d is what you can choose. It has lenght 1, lenght 2, and every n that > you can choose.
MY d has length greater than 1, and greater than 2, and greater than any natural number that you, or anyone else, can chose.
Any line which is not of length greater than any natural one can choose must be of length less than or equal to some natural one can choose.