Date: Feb 25, 2013 10:11 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On Feb 25, 3:53 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> Once upon a time you have been asserting that more than one line are
> necessary to contain all that can be contained of d. This collection
> of lines may be a set - it does not matter. But every set of lines of
> L has a first element. You cannot name the first element l_n, you
> cannot name the n.



Again, the deliberate confusion between the number of elements
in a set, and the elements of the set.
Round and Round we go.

We both agree

There does not exist an m
such that the mth line
of L is coFIS with the diagonal
(here we interpret "There does
not exist" to mean "we cannot find").

Indeed if we throw findable in
we agee with a lot of stuff.

There is no findable largest natural
number.

There is no ball with a findable index
in the vase.