On Jun 20, 11:22 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > On 20 Jun., 19:34, FredJeffries <fredjeffr...@gmail.com> > > > Speaking of taking the union of a sequence is gibberish. Treating a > > sequence of sets as a set of sets is the work of a chowderhead, a > > clown > > or a charlatan. > > Isn't a sequence of X an ordered set of X without repetitions? In > particular an inclusion monotonic strictly increasing sequence is an > ordered set. > > Regards, WM
No. A sequence is a function with domain the natural numbers.