In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 7 Mai, 22:45, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <656e14c3-aca7-4907-9487-89e9700ae...@m7g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > On 7 Mai, 21:47, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > > > > The union of lines > > > > > cannot contain more elements than one line contains. > > > > > > Why not? > > > > > Because by construction all elements are in the last line already. > > > > What last line? > > The last line would be that line that contains all natural numbers. > If there is no last line, as it appears to be the case, then there are > never all natural numbers.
Wrong and wrong! If each line is a FISON (finite initial set of naturals) then there is no last FISON unless there is a last natural, but every natural has a successor, so no last natural, and no last FISON, and no last line.
But as every natural is in all but finitely many FISONs and every FISON is a line, the lack of a last line is no problem, at least not outside Wolkenmuekenheim.
> And never means never
But WM's "never" is invalid outside Wolkenmuekenheim. . > > > > The whole point of your partial diagram is that there is no last line, > > Of course. > > > > > Unless there is some line that contains all other lines as subsets, > > > > it is inevitable that the union contain more than any one line. > > > > > Obviously impossible in the list that I constructed. > > > > That is only because you did not finish your construction. > > I did all that can be done in mathematics.
Outside of Wolkenmuekenheim it is spelled "WMytheology", and what you do inside it matters not at all, because outside of it is where all real mathematics takes place.. --