In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 8 Mrz., 17:15, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 8, 4:55 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > On 8 Mrz., 15:45, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > WM: There does not exist > > > > (in the sense of not findable) > > > > a natural number m such that > > > > the mth line of L is coFIS with > > > > d > > > > > > So let's talk about d the way you > > > > talk about d. > > > > You find it reasonable to say > > > > a line of L is not coFIS with d > > L = d > Every line L_k of L is identical with FIS d_1, ..., d_k of d. > d is nothing but it sFIS
Outside WM's fanciful fiefdom of Wolkenmuekenheim, ther is a distinction between the union of a family of sets and the family itself.
The list, which is a family or set of lines, each line being a set of naturals, is not the same as d, which is the union of all members of that family, and thus a set of naturals.
Until WM can distinguish between a family of sets and the union of the sets in such a family, he will never be able get things straight. > > > > > The question is > > > > Do you agree with the statement > > > > g is not coFIS with d. > > Let us remember: > Two potentially infinite sequences x and y are said to be coFIS iff > for every natural number n, the nth FIS of x is equal to the nth FIS > of y.
Outside WM's futile fiefdom of Wolkenmuekenheim, there are no merely potential sets which are not actual sets. and there are actually infinite sets. . > > This is obviously the case for that line L_max which is identical with > the maximal FIS of d:
Since d does not have maximal FIS outside WM's futile fiefdom of Wolkenmuekenheim, we are not amused by his idiocy in claiming it. > > 1, 2, 3, ..., max = 1, 2, 3, ..., max > On the the left-hand side you see the line L_max or g, on the right- > hand side you see d, i.e., everything that in potential infinity can > be assumed to exist of lines and d.
Nowhere outside WM's futile fiefdom of Wolkenmuekenheim is there a natural with no successor natural nor a FIS of the set of naturals without a successor FIS.
And WM's powers do not extend beyond the limited and limiting-to-him boundaries of WM's futile fiefdom of Wolkenmuekenheim.
And where is WM's proof that some mapping from the set of all binary sequences to the set of all paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping? WM several times claimed it but cannot seem to prove it.
Whenever WM realizes how far over his head he has plunged, he dumps that thread and jumps to something else. --