On 3/24/2013 4:32 AM, WM wrote: > On 24 Mrz., 03:01, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > >> So the union of any non-empty but finite set of of FISONs is always a >> FISON, but the union of any infinite set of FISONs is always |N, which >> is not a FISON. > > And that is the foolish belief of matheologians, who are incapable of > distinguishing the potentially infinite sequence of natural numbers
It shall be distinguished when it is properly defined.
> from a completed actually infinite set |N that is more than every > FISON.
Please define "more than" in a meaningful way for this context.
> but since once upon a time this confusion has > occured, meanwhile there are thousands of believers. Probably it lies > in the nature of humans to have at least some irrational items for > their wish to believe.
It is not about belief. It is about being able to do effective mathematics that may be applied to the continuum.
Your theory of monotonic inclusive crayon marks just does not seem to fit the bill.