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