```Date: Mar 2, 2013 6:08 PM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On Mar 2, 11:10 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 2 Mrz., 19:24, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>> > On Mar 2, 6:27 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > 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 each believe that our m(t) is not constant.>> > We also agree that there does not exist> > (in the sense of not able to find) a> > natural number n such that the> > nth line of L is coFIS with the> > diagonal.>> > I find your characterization of this> > situation as "there is a natural> > number m such that the mth line> > of L is coFIS with the diagonal">> since there do not exist more than m FIS of the diagonal.>> > to be silly.>> Because you do not yet fully understand potential infinity: There do> not exist more than m FIS of the diagonal.Oh, I understand all right.  It is just that I thinkcalling m (which cannot be a findablenatural number and behaves exactly like m(t))a natural number is silly.>> Question: Do you find your characterization of the situation in> finished infinity not silly? Don't you see a mathematical> contradiction of the sentence: There are all FIS of d in the list but> not in one single line?>Not at all. Clearlythere are all FIS of d in one single lineiff there is a last line.I do not consider the sentence"There is no last line"to be a contradiction.
```