In article <email@example.com>, Zeit Geist <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sunday, July 7, 2013 3:59:33 PM UTC-7, Julio Di Egidio wrote: > > "Zeit Geist" <email@example.com> wrote in message > > > > news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > > > > > > > > >> "That conclusion is patently illogical: at that very time t_n, > > > > >> 2 more marbles get in." Julio > > > > > > > > > > Which is treating the infinite just as the finite. > > > > > > > > Bollocks, you just cannot read, and I'll leave you at that. > > > > I read at any finite, twice as many are put in than removed; > hence, at any finite step it is NOT empty. > Therefore, it is NOT empty after aleph_0 steps. > And, that is invalid deduction! > > If that is not what that sentence means to you, > please let me know how you interpret it.
I understand the tale thus: A given vase is originally empty; Numbered balls are inserted into the vase and removed such that each numbered ball is entered into the vase at a time before noon and that same ball is removed from the vase at a later time but still before noon.
Is there anything wrong with that description?
If not then all the balls inserted into the vase before noon are also removed before noon. --