In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 10 Apr., 16:10, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Apr 10, 12:26 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > > On 10 Apr., 08:59, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > > ... we are agreed that it makes perfect > > > > sense to say that any one line (and all its predecessors) > > > > can be removed, but the collection of all lines > > > > cannot be removed > > > > > By a single move. When applying induction, i.e., when n is removed, > > > also n+1 is removed, every finite line is removed. Then no finite > > > lines remain - only actually infinite lines remain. > > > > Nope. You can only use induction to show that a finite > > collection of finite lines can be removed. > > You cannot use induction to prove > > that the collection of all finite lines can be removed. > > That's wrong (even if it is your opinion).
If removing all lines is allowed to leave only an empty set behind then one can remove all lines, but if one is requires to have a non-empty set left, one cannot remove all lines.
At least that's the way it works outside of Wolkenmuekenheim.
> Sorry. Induction holds for > all n.
But only for those who know how to use it, which WM clearly does not! --