Date: Jan 29, 2013 8:27 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 203
On Jan 29, 12:28 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 29 Jan., 12:02, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > To summarize

>

> > For every natural number, n, the antidiagonal,d, of a list L

> > is not equal to the nth line of L

>

> > A statement WM has made.

>

> > A) For every natural number n, P(n) is true.

> > implies

> > B) There does not exist a natural number n such that P(n) is

> > false.

>

> > A statement WM has made.

>

> > There does not exist a natural number n such that d is

> > equal to the nth line of L

>

> > A statement WM disputes

>

> I do not dispute this statement (as I erroneously had said yesterday,

> when being in a hurry). I dispute that this statement implies the

> statement:

> d is not in one of all lines of the infinite list L

It does, however, imply that d is not

of the the lines of the infinite list L.

> and, hence, cannot

> be used to argue that cardinality is increased.

> (The reson is that "all" is maeningless here.)

>

> What about C1, C2, C3?

I neither know nor care.