```Date: Mar 5, 2013 4:57 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 4 Mrz., 23:56, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Mar 4, 6:57 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>>>>>> > On 3 Mrz., 23:35, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> > > On Mar 3, 10:56 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > > > On 3 Mrz., 17:36, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> > > > > On Mar 3, 12:41 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>> > > > > > Why don't you simply try to find a potentially infinity set of natural> > > > > > numbers (i.e. excluding matheological dogmas like "all prime numbers"> > > > > > or "all even numbers") that is not in one single line?>> > > > >   the potentially infinite set of every natural number> > > > is always finite - up to every natural number.> > > > If you don't like that> > > > recognition, try to name a number that does not belong to a FISON.> > > > This set is always in one line. You should understand that every> > > > number is in and hence every FISON is a line of the list.>> > > Indeed, but the question is whether there is one single line of the> > > list that contains every FISON.  We know that such a line> > > cannot be findable.  There is the unfindable, variable,> > > a different one for each person, line l_m.  However, calling> > > l_m "one single line of the list" is silly.>> > On the other hand, you claim>>      Let K be a (possibly potentially infinite) set of> lines of L. Then>>      Every FISON of d is in a findable line of K>      iff K does not have a findable last lineNo, false quote. Every findable FIS of d is in a findable line of L112123...,since L is identical with the FIS of d. (K will not improve anything.)>> WM's claim: sillyOnly for those who deny the possibility of identity for potentiallyinfinite sets.>> WH's claim: not sillymore than silly, namely a proof of unquestioning belief in nonsense."All FIS of d are in infinitely many lines."Wrong, since infinity does not change the condition that there arenever two or more lines of L that contain more than one single line.WH's claim is tantamount to the claims: "An infinite sequence of W'scontains an M" or "An infinite sequence of finite natural numberscontains an infinite narural number".A very instructive example for the detrimental influence of matheologyon innocent pupils.Regards, WM
```