```Date: Jan 30, 2013 4:22 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 203

On 30 Jan., 10:05, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 30, 9:57 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>>>>>> > On 30 Jan., 09:40, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> > > On Jan 30, 9:28 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > > > On 30 Jan., 00:16, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> > > > > On Jan 29, 10:11 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > > > > > On 29 Jan., 21:28, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> > > > > <snip>>> > > > > > > It does, however, imply that d in not one> > > > > > > of the lines of the list L>> > > > > > For that sake you must check all lines. Can you check what is not> > > > > > existing?>> > > > > So now your claim is>> > > > > We can know>> > > > >   There does not exist a natural number n> > > > >   such that d is equal to the nth line> > > > >   of L>> > > > > but we cannot know>> > > > >   d is not one of the lines of L>> > > > You are trying hard to misunderstand!>> > > Do you agree>> > >  i. There does not exist a natural number n> > >     such that d is equal to the nth line> > >     of L>> > > and>> > >  ii.  d is one of the lines of L>> > > are mutually exclusive?->> > In existing finite sets this is true. In actually infinite sets it is> > not true,>> Does>>   ii.  d is one of the lines of L>> imply>>   iii.  there is a natural number n such that>         d is equal to the nth line of LIn  finite sets or potentially infinite sets this is true, of course.Reason: Every line n can be checked since we can go to line n+1.In actually infinite sets it is not true, since there must be morelines than every number n can reach. Remember: Beyond every n therefollow more loines than can be reached by a natural number or can bemeasured by a natural number or can be enumerated by natural numbers.Regards, WM
```