Date: Jan 15, 2013 4:12 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: WMatheology � 191
In article

<3e51ac5e-0aa6-4c17-8353-d6db63f3a805@ho8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

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

> On 15 Jan., 19:45, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

>

> > > That does not help. It can only differ at finite places.

> >

> > It takes infinitely many finite "places" to make an infinite sequence.

>

> That does not help you. There are infinitely many finite initial

> sequences such that no finite combination of nodes or digits is

> missing.

But every infinite combination is missing so any infinite combination

differs from every finite combination.

>

> > And it is quite legitimate to speak of some property as belonging to

> > "ALL" of those "places" outside of WMytheology, even though the set of

> > such "places" must be an infinite set.

>

> The the following sequence must have all natural numbers as negative

> exponents:

>

> 1) 10^-1

> 2) 10^-1 + 10^-2

> 3) 10^-1 + 10^-2 + 10^-3

> ...

> oo) 10^-1 + 10^-2 + 10^-3 + ... (not containig 10^-oo)

>

> And they all must be in one line. But that line does not exist. There

> exists only the limit 1/9. But 1/9 is not a term of this sequence. It

> differs from the sequence by having all natural numbers as negative

> exponents.

You prove my point that the infinite sequence is different from every

finite sequence.

>

> Alas, how can there be all finite terms of the sequence, enumerated by

> all finite natural numbers, whereas all natural numbers as exponents

> already are beyond the finite terms?

Which terms in your

"oo) 10^-1 + 10^-2 + 10^-3 + ... (not containig 10^-oo)"

are "beyond all finite terms"?

I do not find anything in it that is beyond all finite terms.

But then I am not constrained by WMytheology

--