Date: Feb 25, 2013 9:58 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 222 Back to the roots
In article

<c7ea35ae-26f5-464b-8155-959befbfed3e@j9g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,

WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 25 Feb., 16:11, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > 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").

>

> And again you interpret as *the* diagonal the actual infinity of *all*

> its elements.

That is what it is everywhere outside WMytheology.

>

> *Every* FIS of the diagonal is a line.

Granted, and every line is merely a FIS of the diagonal, not the whole.

> What we cannot find is a last line and is a last FIS of the diagonal.

Because they do not exist. Those like WM, who look for them may as

easily find fairies at the bottom of their gardens.

> *Both* are unfindable. Therefore it is highly biased to talk about

> *the* diagonal.

Outside of WMytheology, "THE Diagonal" of such a list can be

unambiguously defined.

Inside of WMytheology, nothing seems to be unambiguously defined.

> >

> > 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.

>

> And there is no findable set of natural numbers (remember, we cannot

> use "all natural numbers" and related sets) that would require more

> than one line.

There is outside WMYTHEOLOGY.

--