On 3/23/2013 11:05 AM, WM wrote: > On 23 Mrz., 01:08, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: >> In article >> <cab606ea-29e6-48ae-97c1-56cd1fd39...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>, >> >> WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: >>> On 22 Mrz., 16:24, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>> And what is in your opinion beyond any finite set of lines? >> >>>> There is no such thing >>>> as "beyond every finite set of lines". >>>> Infinite sets are different from finite sets >>>> but they do not contain anything >>>> "beyond any finite set". >> >>> The decimal expansion of pi is not beyond any finite (i.e. rational) >>> approximation? >> >> Since the decimal expansion of p is made up of digits in sequence, WM >> needs to tell us which is the first of its digits tot exceeds finite >> approximation? >> -- > > If there is not more then all finite approximations, then there is no > uncountability, because all rational approximations belong to a > countable set. >
That was not what the question asked.
Your propensity for pretending at Socratic dialogue makes reading this stuff a nightmare.
You have imposed the material restrictions. Your question implies otherwise. In response, Virgil wants to know what finite number is beyond finiteness.