In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: >On 20 Feb., 23:27, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is the statement >> >> There is no natural number m >> such that the mth line of L and x >> are coFIS >> >> true?- > >No, the statement is wrong. The true statement is: We cannot find the >largest number such that the mth line and x are coFIS. Again you >assume actual infinity for x. > >Consider the union of ordered sets in ZF: >(1, ) >(1, 2, ) >(1, 2, 3, ) > >Each set has a blank.
You seem to be implicitly using this order relation: - if p and q are naturals, then pRq iff p<q and qRp iff q<p - if r is a natural, then rR' ' (in other words any natural comes before a blank)
Is my understanding correct?
-- Michael F. Stemper #include <Standard_Disclaimer> "Writing about jazz is like dancing about architecture" - Thelonious Monk