In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 18 Apr., 09:26, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <4ab7c57a-19d2-4302-b030-8552e90c4...@f18g2000vbs.googlegroups.com>, > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > On 18 Apr., 08:19, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > > > > WM cannot be an ultrafinitist and > > > > expect others to not hold him to > > > > task for it. > > > > > There is a third way: potential infinity. > > > > If there is a form of consistent mathematics using only potential > > infiniteness, WM has yet to find it, > > Cauchy, Gauss, Weierstraß, Kronecker, Poincaré, Brouwer have left a > lot of writings about that system. No need to re-invent it. Read it!
If WM has read it, it has been to no avail for him, as whatever he has learnt from it , it is not mathematics. --