```Date: Feb 12, 2013 4:19 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 12 Feb., 09:55, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:> In article> <1e0deeb6-09db-46a2-8806-47123450d...@w4g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,>>>>>>  WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> > On 11 Feb., 22:47, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> > > You do not see a contradiction in concluding> > > both>> > >    everything that is in some line> > >    of the list is in one line of the list.>> > > and>> > >    there does not exist a natural number m> > >    such that the potentially infinite sequence> > >    d is equal to the potentially infinite> > >    sequence given by the mth line.>> > Why do you distract the attention of the reader?> > Of course I see a contradiction.> > This contradiction has its origin in the assumption that a potentially> > infinite sequence is something that could be complete enough to be in> > a line or elsewhere.>> If the decimal expansion for 1/3 cannot be actually infinite, it can> only be because there is some FISON which indexes all its digits.>>>> > Everybody can see it clearly here:>> > 1> > 1, 2> > 1, 2, 3> > ...>> > This list has everything that is in the diagonal in a line too. But> > nowhere we have a completed diagonal>> As soon as you include the "...", you have completed it.That is the current matheological interpretation. But we see that thisvery interpretation leads to the contradiction that d is in the listand is not in the list.Regards, WM
```