In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 16 Feb., 23:01, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > it occurs to me that his issue with the reversal > > of quantifiers in relation to directed set structure > > is the key. > > You are in error. The argument is much more complicated than primitive > quaantifyer reversal.
On the other hand, WM has frequently been caught at quantifier dyslexia
> > The argument is, unfamiliar as it is: d is nothing but every FIS > d_1, ..., d_n.
According to WM's above analysis, d must nave a last member, which would make it actually finite.
> And it is obvious that every FIS is a line.
But no two of them are entirely separate lines.
Of each pair of FISs, one is a FIS of the other and both are FISs of yet others, without end.
This > statement can only be checked up to every finite n. Therefore d is not > ouside of every line.
Outside of Wolkenmuekenheim, either d is included in some FIS or d is not included in any FIS, TND.
And what goes on inside Wolkenmuekenheim is of no consequnce to those who are not captives in WMs schule. --