Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology § 293
Replies: 44   Last Post: Jun 27, 2013 2:25 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Virgil Posts: 8,833 Registered: 1/6/11
Re: WMytheology � 293
Posted: Jun 20, 2013 4:03 PM

In article
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 20 Jun., 17:10, FredJeffries <fredjeffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 3:09 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> >
> >
> >

> > > But, abracadabra, if you union the results of infinitely many unions,
> > > then you get the missing aleph_0 numbers.

> >
> > No. You do not do infinitely many unions. That is nonsense.
> >
> > You do ONE union.

>
> You seem to have not yet understood.

On the contrary, FJ understands a great deal better than WM does.

But I enjoy to explain it again,
> and again, and again, ... because the story is incredible.

Until WM has repeated his "explanations" an actually infinite number of
times, he will convince no one but himself of that which even Brouwer
rejects.
>
> Every set of the sequence
>
> 1,
> 1, 2
> 1, 2, 3
> ...
>
> is the union of all its predecessors and its last {n}.
>
> There are infinitely many sets, so there are infinitely many unions.
>
> None of these infinitely many unions yields |N, although every union

There is also one single union concatenating all infinitely many of the
the infinitely many sets that WM has conceded the existence of.

And it is that one union that proves WM totally wrong.
>
> After you pause, exhausted, since you failed to get |N but got only
> sets which a lacking aleph_0 natural numbers

WM may pause exhausted, but others do only one union of a set of
infinitely many FISONs to get one resulting set containing all
infinitely many FISONs as proper subsets.

That WM is incapable of doing anything so straightforward is one measure
of how crooked all things are in Wolkenmuekenheim,

> you pray and do a last
> union.

Nope, we only need one union, a first one, of all infinitely many FISONs
to get our |N.

If none of WM's unions of FISONs get it, WM will never get it.
--