```Date: Jan 25, 2013 7:07 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: ZFC and God

In article <3cff19c6-f362-4ef4-9609-3159bd5f9c73@h2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 25 Jan., 19:52, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes:> > >> Is t_i(i) also defined for every i in N?> >> > > Yes, of course, with absolute certainty.> >> > >> Assuming you will say yes, then I must ask:> >> > >> Is d(i) therefore defined for every i in N?> >> > > Yes, of course, with absolute certainty.> >> > > And nothing of that takes us out of the domain of all terminating> > > decimals, because ;> >> > >> > In ZF every n in N is finite.> >> > > and with it every FISON.> >> > Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves just yet.> >> > You agree that, for every i in N, d(i) is defined.> >> > I suppose you also agree that, for every i in N, d(i) != 0 and> > d(i) != 9, right?> >> > Okay, so d(i) is defined for every i in N, and d(i) is non-zero and> > not nine.> >> > Clearly, d is a non-terminating decimal.> > The set of all FISONs is not terminating. Is there a non-terminating> FISON? No.If a set of all FISONs exists at all, which that above statement  concedes, then the union all members of that set is a set, after which, exist decimals with a digit for each member of that union.WM cannot have it both ways. > > Try to understand that and evaluate the consequences. It is useless to> go on unless you got it that we work in the domain of terminating> decimals.Which hellhole WM condemns himself to work in is irrelevant to anyone else, as others can easily work elsewhere, and do.--
```