```Date: Mar 7, 2013 3:56 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 222 Back to the roots

In article <5f771d18-3500-464b-a3ac-909bba01e0f8@o5g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 7 Mrz., 11:35, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> > On Mar 7, 11:12 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> >> >> > > On 6 Mrz., 23:48, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > > > On Mar 6, 7:44 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> >> > > > > On 6 Mrz., 13:18, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> > > > <snip>> >> > > > > >    A subset K of the lines of L> > > > > >    contains every FIS of d iff> > > > > >    K has no findable last line.> >> > > > > No> >> > > > Let G be a subset of the lines of L> > > > with a findable last line.  Call> > > > this line g.> >> > Note> >> > There does not exist> > (in the sense of not findable)> > a natural number m such that> > the mth line of L is coFIS with> > d> > Note, there does not exist d other than as every FIS. There does outside of WMytheology. In real mathematics, d is merely the union of all lines, which is not itself one of those lines.>These FISs are> the same as the lines. Every findable thing in one set has a> corresponding finadable thing in the other. There is no difference> constructible.One set, the set of lines, is the set of FISs of the other, dEvery line is subset of d, but no line is a member of d.WM has a long history of being unable to distinguish between the members of and the subsets of a given set, and that difference appears here to be confounding him again.> > Regards, WMAnd where is WM's proof that some mapping from the set of all binary sequences to the set of all paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping?WM several times claimed it but cannot seem to prove it.--
```