Date: Feb 11, 2013 3:39 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 214
On 10 Feb., 23:59, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:

> On 2/10/2013 3:55 PM, Virgil wrote:

>

>

>

>

> >>> Please explain "existing set".

>

> >> An existing set is a set that is finite or potentially infinite.

>

> > That would require all of them to already exist, implying that no new

> > ones could ever be created, or invented, or discovered.

>

> > Thus in WMYTHEOLOGY there can never be anything new.

>

> What would be the consequence of that invariance?

>

> Every potentially infinite set already exists.

Who said so?

I said if existing, then finite or pot infinite.

Now you return if pot infinite then existing.

Logic?

Try to understand: A ==> B does not imply B ==> A.

Then you may go on to learn logic step by step, but not before

understanding this (small step for mankind, but obviously big step for

you).

>

> Thus, potential infinity is immanent infinity.

No.

>

> This is Cantor's argument.

Yes he made the same step. And his followers gladly accepted it. He

exchanged quantifyers on his "extended integers":

"For every integer n, there exists integer m: m >= n"

to

"There exists integer m, such that for every integer n: m >= n."

No reason to be proud about "understanding" that.

Regards, WM