Date: Jan 31, 2013 5:19 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 203
In article

<5fb6c90f-9fdc-4713-bd7f-a783c4feb55d@k4g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,

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

> Would you say that a line that is not in the list is in the list?

>

> Of course we can construct another line that is not in the list by

> diagonalization. But in the same way we can construct a line number

> that is not in the list by diagonalization

Since line numbers are necessarily natural numbers, all of which have

already been used to identify lines, WM is claiming the existence of a

natural number other than the first that is not the successor of any

natural number.

--