```Date: Mar 16, 2013 7:25 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224

In article <3711021c-d3eb-4fa3-8a81-161d8f5ef82c@a8g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 16 Mrz., 21:19, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:> > > > In potential infinity there is no necessary line except the last one.> > > We know that with certainty from induction. Every found and fixed line> > > n cannot be necessary, because the next line contains it.> >> > AS soon as something is identifies as a natural or a FIS of the set of> > naturals, it has a successor. It cannot be either a natural nor a FIS of> > the naturals without a successor. at least by any standard definition of> > naturals.> > As soon as a second becomes presence, it has a successor. It cannot be> presence. Nevertheless presence exists.Thus in WMytheology one must have the existence of non-existing objects.I prefer infinities to WM's need for having what one does not have.> >> > Can WM provide an definition for natural numberss which doe not state,> > or at least imply, that every natural must have a successor natural?> > Numbers are creations of the mind. Without minds there are no numbers.Which is not a relevant answer. Can WM provide an definition for natural numberss which doe not state,or at least imply, that every natural must have a successor natural?> >> > > Everything that is in the list> > > 1> > > 1, 2> > > 1, 2, 3> > > ...> > > 1, 2, 3, ..., n> > > is in the last line. Alas as soon as you try to fix it, it is no> > > longer the last line.> >> > Thus it is unfixable that where there is a last line there are not all> > lines nor all naturals.> >> > Mathematics outside of Wolkenmuekenheim  deals successfully with endless> > processes all the time,> > but you are not able to write aleph_0 digits of a real numbers like> 1/9. So what? There are lot of things in mathematics one cannot do, but that should not keep us from doing what we can do, the way you would limit us.######################################################################WM has frequently claimed that his mapping from the set of all infinite binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping.In order to show that such a mapping is a linear mapping, WM must first show that the set of all binary sequences is a vector space and that the set of paths of a CIBT is also a vector space, which he has not done and apparently cannot do, and then show that his mapping satisfies the linearity requirement that    f(ax + by) = af(x) + bf(y),where a and b are arbitrary members of the field of scalars and x and y and f(x) and f(y) are arbitrary members of suitable linear spaces.  While this is possible, and fairly trivial for a competent mathematician to do, WM has not yet been able to do it.But frequently claims to have already done it.--
```