In article <fc045ff4-60b4-4e93-a086-afc3bd1b79c1@k4g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 24 Feb., 00:34, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 23, 5:18 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ====================== > > > > > > Can you identify a FIS of d that is not in a line l of L? > > > > > No > > > > > > You cannot. Nevertheless d consists of FIS of lines of L, and of > > > > nothing else, by definition and by construction of d. > > > > Or do you object to this fact? > > > > > No. > > > > > =============================== > > > > > Why then are you raising the impression as if you were trying to argue > > > that d is not with *all its existence* in the lines of the list? > > > > I agree that d "with *all its existence*" > > is in the lines of the list. > > I do not agree that this means > > d with all its existence is in > > one line of the list.- > > Remember: Potential infinity goes to every n, but not farther. And for > every n d with all its existence is in line n of the list.
And for every line in the list, there are more FISs of d longer than that line than as short as that line!
And for every line of length n, there is a FIS of d that is more than n times as long as that line. --
