In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 19 Apr., 14:28, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > > > >>>> If numbers existed only as names then different names would necessarily > > >>>> represent different numbers, > > > > Those are called negative existential statements. > > No, those are called nonsense.
Nowhere nearly as nonsensical as WM's notion that there can exist a natural that cannot have a successor, or a double, or for which no larger natural can exist.
According to the way naturals are DEFINED in terms of successorship, there can be only one which is not a successor and none at all which do not have a successor.
So that WM's infantile claims to have naturals with no successors is in contradiction to the very nature of naturals. --