Date: Mar 16, 2013 4:07 PM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On 16 Mrz., 20:46, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:

> > > A positive finite number of lines in necessary

>

> > A positive finite number of lines contains a least element.

>

> True, but irrelevant to the issue of a set of lines covering d.

The lines ofthe set have numbers. These numbers can be unioned into a

set of natural numbers. This set has a least element! But we cannot

find it, because Virgil calls it "irrelevant".

>

>

>

> > > We have the choice between 1 line (in potential

>

> > > > infinity) and 0 lines (in actual infinity).

>

> > > Is that a Royal "We"?

>

> > No it includes evlerybody, many don't know though.

>

> So that WM claims that in WMytheology, 1 line covers d but everywhere

> else 0 lines cover d?

No, Ithis proves that in the land of actual infinity, that you call

"everywhere", something goes wrong. I shouldn't be surprised to see

that the reason is ctual infinity.

>

> ***********************************************************************

>

> WM has frequently claimed that a mapping from the set of all infinite

> binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping.

Proven in Matheology § 226.

Regards, WM