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.

--