In article <a565ed65-fe6e-44d2-b938-180de57ecc16@cd3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 12 Mrz., 16:50, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I say a lot of wrong things. But it > > does not matter much. Anything I > > say can easily be translated into > > something correct. > > How would you translate your credo: The list contains more numbers > than fit into a single line? This sentence is completely foreign to > potential infinity.
Assuming that one is referring to a list like 1: 1 2: 1,2 3: 1,2,3 ...
Then for every line n, there is a line n+1 containing more than n terms.
Which follows from any standard definition of the natural numbers.
Perhaps WM would care to share with us his definition of or test for how to tell what is a natural number form something which is not a natural number?
> > And perhaps you will show some such numbers, at least two, which do > not fit into one single line?
Given any two naturals, both are members of the union of their two FISONs, which is necessarily also a FISON.
In, fact any finite set of naturals is contained in some FISON.
WM has frequently claimed that a mapping from the set of all infinite binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping. In order to show that such a mapping is a linear mapping, WM must first show that the set of all binary sequences is a vector space and that the set of paths of a CIBT is also a vector space, which he has not done and apparently cannot do, and then show that his mapping satisfies the linearity requirement that f(ax + by) = af(x) + bf(y), where a and b are arbitrary members of a field of scalars and x and y are f(x) and f(y) are vectors in suitable linear spaces.
By the way, WM, what are a, b, ax, by and ax+by when x and y are binary sequences?
If a = 1/3 and x is binary sequence, what is ax ? and if f(x) is a path in a CIBT, what is af(x)?
Until these and a few other issues are settled, WM will still have failed to justify his claim of a LINEAR mapping from the set (but not yet proved to be vector space) of binary sequences to the set (but not yet proved to be vector space) of paths ln a CIBT.
Just another of WM's many wild claims of what goes on in his WMytheology that he cannot back up. --
