Date: Mar 12, 2013 6:44 AM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots

On 12 Mrz., 11:08, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 12, 10:19 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

> > On 12 Mrz., 00:51, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>

> > > There is a fixed column, C_1, which is coFIS to
> > > |N.   There is no fixed line which is coFIS to |N

>
> > There is no |N in potential infinity.
>
> |N is the potentially infinite set of natural numbers.
>

The "potentially infinite set" is already a contradictio in adjecto,
because the notion of set always requires completenes.

> > There is a problem with the statement, of actual infinity, that all
> > natural numbers are in the list but not in any single line.

>
> Note, in Wolkenmuekenheim
> all natural numbers are in the list but not in any single
> findable line.


No, there are not *all* natural numbers in any healthy mathematical
theory. Have you read hundreds of posts without learning that basic
stuff?
>
> There is no difference between "actual" and potential
> infinity as long as we restrict things to
> findable quantities.


If you are incapable of learning what potential infinity means, as it
is suggested by your statements above, then your assertion is
understandable but nevertheless wrong.

Actual infinity requires that *all* natural numbers are in the list
but not in a single line. That is a contradiction. Since they are, in
fact, not in a single line (since there is no last findable line),
only the other alternative can be wrong: The existence of all natural
numbers.

Regards, WM