In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 3 Mrz., 23:47, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > While what is contained in any set of lines WHICH HAS A LAST LINE is > > contained in that last line, when one is outside of Wolkenmuekenheim, > > MOST sets of lines do not have a last line, and no such set has all > > members of all its lines in any one line. > > It is not a matter of a last line. It is enough that every line > contains all that its predecessors contain. This shows that there is > never more than one line required to contain all preceding lines.
But that does not meant that any one line can contain all lines, at least not unless there is a last line. One of WMs lines can contain all its predecessors but not any of its successors, but for infinite well-ordered lists of lines each a FIS of all its successors and each line having a successor of which it is a proper FIS, such as exist everywhere outside of Wolkenmuekenheim, there is never one line containing any of its successors, nor any line containing all other lines. > > Does a sequence of white sheep necessarily contain a black sheep, if > it is infinite? > > > > > > And which parts of Tristram's life are not described in his diary? > > > > Until it is proved that Tristam Shandy is now dead, one cannot assume > > that he is not still writing it. > > > Until the rational numbers are finished one cannot assume that they > are not more than the naturals.
Name one rational that is not included in the set of all of them. > > > > And I defy WM to produce Shandy's death > > certificate. > > That is produced (faked) by adherents of finished infinity.
Why would they bother to fake something that might be used against them?
Whereas WM has a very good reason to fake it, as such a fake could make the Tristam issue seem real instead of the fake it is.
And WM still is unable to prove that any bijection from the set of all binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT can be a linear map. --