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 So why should anything be withdrawn?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 The notion of potential infiniteness should be withdrawn as it is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The notion of "infinite set" should be withdrawn as incompatible with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