Date: Feb 11, 2013 4:26 PM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 11 Feb., 22:19, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

> > Only *if the complete existence of the not completely existing
> > diagonal d is assumed*, it would be necessary to have it in the list
> > and (since every line of the list contains everything that is
> > contained by its predecessors) to have it in a line of the list. But
> > obviously a potentially infinite diagonal does not exist completely
> > (as the potentially infinite list does not exist completely).

>
> > So why should anything be withdrawn?
>
> The notion of potential infiniteness should be withdrawn as it is
> incompatible with the notion of "set".


The notion of "infinite set" should be withdrawn as incompatible with
logic.

> One cannot have a set whose membership is only potentially determined.

Name a part of the diagonal which is not in the list. Name two
elements of the diagonal, indexed with natural numbers, which are not
in one single line.

Regards, WM