In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 24 Apr., 00:23, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > > As I observed before, you are welcome > > to introduce a logic and a mathematics > > to support your beliefs. > > There is nothing to introduce.
Wm has already introduced his too many of is beliefs but cannot back them up with anything like logic.
> The required logic exists as well the > mathematics.
If so, WM has yet to demonstrate the existence of either. > > If a set of lines contains > > (1) a complete set of numbers, but > (2) no line contains the complete set of numbers
Presumably WM means only natural numbers. But WM has no definition of natural numbers which properly distinguishes between numbers that are naturals and those that are not naturals, since he never specifies which natural is that largest natural whose infinitely many successors are no longer naturals.
, > then obviously a number must be missing in every line. But no number > must be missing in all lines. Now try to apply logic to find a > configuration of lines that satifies this criterion. The set of lines > is not > > 1 > 1, 2 > 1, 2, 3 > ...
That very set of lines, endlessly extended, works fine everywhere that is free from WMytheology. --