```Date: Feb 13, 2013 1:02 AM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the root<br> s

On 2/12/2013 3:47 PM, Virgil wrote:> In article> <13ead2a9-0acc-452f-99aa-c2cd81d02ae7@m4g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>,>   WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>>> On 12 Feb., 18:13, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>>> On Feb 12, 2:12 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>>>>>>> There is no line of the list that contains all FISs of d (because>>>> there are not all).>>>>>> Your claim is that there is a line of the list that contains>>> every FIS of d (there is no mention of all)>>>> But you seem to interpret some completeness into "every".>> Remember, beyond *every* FIS there are infinitely many FISs.>> But no FISs beyond *every* FIS.>>>>>> you also claim>>>>>> the potentially infinite sequence d is not equal to the>>> potentially infinite sequence given by a line of the list.>>>> The lines of the list are finite.>> 1>> 12>> 123>> ...>> Or does that property disturb you?I use this model only because it is>> simpler to treat.>>>>>>>> Note that a potentially infinite sequence x is>>> equal to a potentially infinite sequence y iff>>> every FIS of x is a FIS of y and every FIS of>>> y is a FIS of x.  No mention or need of completion.>> That does not hold when comparing an infinite sequences of finite> sequences of digits with an infinite sequence of digits.>> A FIS of a sequence of sequences is not the same as a FIS of a sequence> of individuals. at least not for sequences of more than one object.>> For WM's argument to be calid here one would have to have sequences of 2> or more digits identical to single digits.>As I said.  There are no singular terms for WM.
```