Date: Mar 2, 2013 5:22 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 222 Back to the roots

In article 
<679d0d30-d518-423a-81d6-5867a72514ec@h9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> On 2 Mrz., 17:18, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 2, 1:17 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> >

> > > On 1 Mrz., 23:51, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > The argument is not only time.
> >
> > > > m can change even though the time does not ?
> >
> > > The maximum depends on the personal environment, the capability to
> > > abbreviate numbers, the wish to do so, and many more factors. It
> > > invents relativity into mathematics.

> >
> > Oh so m is not only an unfindable, variable
> > natural number.  Everyone has their own
> > personal m.

>
> Of course. Imagine a world without intelligence.



You man like Wolkenmuekenheim?


>
> And I am convinced to have proved that it is incompatible with actual
> infinity. At least it should be clear that we cannot go to higher
> infinities before we have reached infinity, which will never happen.


That we cannot reach it is hardly proof that it is not there.
Most of the universe is well beyond our reach, but is still there.
--