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.