Date: Feb 7, 2013 4:05 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 7 Feb., 10:03, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 7:45 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

> > Matheology § 222   Back to the roots
>
> > Consider a Cantor-list with entries a_n and anti-diagonal d:
>
> Then, according to WM, d is not a line of the list.


Do you agree that the logic applied in set theory does not make a
difference between "for every" and "for all"?
Can you explain why here, in this decisive case, a difference appears
nevertheless?

Regards, WM