Date: Mar 13, 2013 12:37 PM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 222 Back to the roots
On 13 Mrz., 13:19, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 13, 11:38 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> > On 12 Mrz., 17:09, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > > On Mar 12, 5:00 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

>

> > > > On 12 Mrz., 16:50, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> > > > > I say a lot of wrong things. But it

> > > > > does not matter much. Anything I

> > > > > say can easily be translated into

> > > > > something correct.

>

> > > > How would you translate your credo: The list contains more numbers

> > > > than fit into a single line? This sentence is completely foreign to

> > > > potential infinity.

>

> > > Let the potentially infinite sequence of

> > > numbers in the list be X.

> > > There is no findable line that is coFIS to (X).

>

> > And perhaps you will show some such numbers, at least two, which do

> > not fit into one single line?

>

> There are no such numbers (in either actual or potential

> infinity) and I have never claimed that there are.

The claim that all numbers are there and not all are in a single line

implies that all numbers are in at least two different lines. That

logic cannot be circumvented.

> If you wish to contest this, use my words not

> yours (e.g. I have never said "The list contains more

> numbers than fit into a single line", I have said

> "There is no line in the list which contains every

> number in the list".)

Correct. The list has more numbers than a single line has. Since every

number that is in the list, must be in at least one line, this implies

that the numbers are in more than one line. More than one, in

quantized systems like lists, meams two at least.

Regards, WM