In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com wrote:
> > For any sequence given by formula, one has already found ALL terms, > > > > That is a matter of definition of "found all".
Given f: |N -> |N: n |-> 2*n, which members of the sequence does WM claim have NOT been found/given by that formula?
> Give one natural number that > is individualized such that everybody knows which number it is and can put it > in trichotomy with any other natural number. I say: Give such a number which > has not infinitely many numbers following it. Or confess that nobody can > individualize all natural numbers.
A sequence which is given by formula, as in my example above, properly has determined the form and value of each of the actually infinitely many terms of that sequence, one for each of the actually infinitely many members of |N. At least eveywhere outside on the lilliputian pseudo-princedom of Wolkenmuekenheim --