```Date: Feb 11, 2013 11:41 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 222 Back to the roots

In article <uqadne7aLr58IYTMnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@giganews.com>, fom <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote:> On 2/11/2013 3:40 PM, Virgil wrote:> > In article> > <9f0b86ba-50b9-4692-8858-6b0788c7ed0c@x15g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>,> >   WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> >> We show that the potentially infinite diagonal is in the list by> >> proving that every o_nn is in the list. And every o that is in the> >> list, is in some line of the list. And everything that is in some line> >> of the list is in one line of the list.> >>> >> Anything wrong with this conclusion?> >> > Every member of a sequence can be in a list of members of sequences> > without the sequence being in the list of sequences.> >> > Consider the list> > L1 = 1, L2 = 2, L3 = 3> > Which does not contain D = 123> > even though every member of D is in one of L1 or L2 or L3> >> > WM's claim is no more true than claiming that the union of a family of> > sets must be one of the family being unioned.> >> > The union of all FISONs (finite initial segments of naturals) is not a> > FISON.> >> > Given a list of all FISONs, the union of them is not a FISON.> > Thus give a list of successively FISON-long strings, a string as long as> > their union cannot be one of them.> >> > Indeed.> > Whatever a "digit" in WMytheology is, I am unable to produce> them to WM's satisfaction (it remains undefined).> > By the same standard, is he not obligated to produce a list> of successively FISON-long strings which include a string as> long as their union?  It has something to do with reality> and existence.  That is how the matter has been so painstakingly> explained to me.That's how I view it too, but WM seems to have some sort of mental astigmatism which prevents from seeing anything mathematical the way mathematicians do.--
```