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.
--