Date: Feb 4, 2013 6:16 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 203

In article 
<2ea1a622-34ec-47bd-b3fb-74daf14bde57@j6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
William Hughes <wpihughes@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Feb 4, 5:29 am, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> > On 2/3/2013 9:20 PM, Virgil wrote:
>
> > >> There is no sensible way of saying that 0.111... is more than every
> > >> FIS.

> >
> > > How about "For all f, (f is a FIS) -> (length(0.111...) > length(f))" .
> >
> > In view of WM's positions, length(0.111...) would have
> > to be the value given to a non-existent.

>
> Nope. According to WM the 0.111... is the potentially
> infinite sequence {.1, .11, .111, ...}
> It certainly exists
>
>
> So length(0.111...) would be the potentially infinite
> sequence {1,2,3, ...}
>
> Thus extending length to infinite sequences is not
> problematic.


Outside of Wolkenmuekenheim it never was.
--