On Apr 5, 11:03 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 5 Apr., 21:03, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 5, 6:04 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > On 5 Apr., 12:08, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > There is an infinite set of lines D > > > > such that any finite subset of D can be removed. > > > > What has to remain? > > > This depends on the finite subset removed. > > If the finite set removed is E then > > D\E has to remain. > > Is E restricted to an upper threshold? > If not, how do you prove its finiteness?
The number of elements in E is a natural number. No upper limit, but finite.
> > > Note that whatever > > subset E is chosen the number of lines > > in D\E is infinite (but of course we > > do not know which lines are in D\E). > > Can you prove for at least one fixed line that it cannot be removed? > If not, why do you think that some (even infinitely many) lines must > remain? > Don't you feel a bit ridiculous, when you again and again claim > infinitely many natural numbers none of which you can name? >
Not at all. Consider a set of natural numbers G. Let G be
all odd numbers or all even numbers
Then G has an infinite number of elements, but you cannot name a single element of G.