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.