Date: Mar 21, 2013 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On 21 Mrz., 14:29, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2:11 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> > On 21 Mrz., 14:02, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In fact? That's amazing. So we cannot prove that all lines of the
> > > > infinite set of lines are unnecessary?
> > > We can prove that something is true for every
> > > member of an infinite set. We cannot
> > > prove that something is true for the set
> > > itself unless the set is finite.
> > But I am not interested in the set itself. Not at all! My claim is
> > that every member of the set of lines can be removed
> Yes, removed one at a time
> >such that no member remains
> nope, working one at a time you will not get
> to the point that no member remains.
Induction does not need time.
The conclusion from n on n+1, if valid, is valid for every natural at