On Apr 11, 8:28 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 10 Apr., 22:53, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > > > Thus, the fact that there is no line (along with > > all its predecessors) that cannot be removed > > is not a contradiction. > > It is not a contradiction with mathematics. So far I agree. But it > would be a contradiction in case someone (and there are many here > around) maintained ~P for some d_n if there is a proof of P for all > FISs of d:
I do not claim this. I claim that the collection of all d_n does not have the property P. Since the fact that there is no d_n that does not have the property P does not mean that the collection of all d_n has the property P there is no contradiction.
> For all n: d_1, d_2, ..., d_n have the property P. > > Matheology requires: The sequence of all d_n constitutes the real > number.
> The sequence of all d_1, ..., d_n does not constitute a real number.
Nope, no one of the elements of the sequence constitues the real number