Date: Feb 28, 2013 6:03 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 27 Feb., 21:28, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 27, 8:21 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

> > Do you prefer your argument?
>
> There is no disagreement over the facts.
>
> We both agree that there is a natural number
> valued function of time, m(t), such that
> at any time t, m(t) is the index of an existing
> line which contains all existing FIS of d.
> We both agree that m(t) is not constant.
>


Until now I was of the opinion that you accept completed infinity.
There is no m(t).

> You think that describing this situation as
>   "there is a line which contains all FISs
>    of d"
> is sensible.


Every FIS of d.
>
> I think that describing this situation as
>  "there is a line which contains all FISs
>    of d"
> is idiotic.
>
> I will not defend my position except to point
> out that many others agree with me,


That is no argument. Many have believed in witches and have even burnt
the. Many, many more than are presently believing in finished
infinity.

> think that your claim
>  "there is a line which contains all FISs
>    of d"
> means something else,



Not all. Every! Again you fall back into actual infinity.

Up to every n, all n are in line n. And more does not exist until you
go to n+1. Remember Dedekind: We *create* numbers. They are not
"there" or somewhere else, because your old position is in
contradiction with the clear fact that the list cannot contain more
than is contained in one single line.

Regards, WM