> > > In a list containing all rational numbers, the counter-argument can be > > written: > > For every n: (d_1, ..., d_n) does not differ from infinitely many > > entries (qk1, ..., qkn) with k > n. > > As stated, this is true. > > As stated, this is irrelevant. > > > > Why should the "for all n" only in one case be exhaustive? > > Universal quantification is always arbitrary.
Maintain your arbitrary given cases, that kill every scientific discourse. Further discussion according to those "rules" is wasted time. My mistake.