```Date: Mar 22, 2013 7:10 PM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 3/22/2013 5:10 PM, WM wrote:> On 22 Mrz., 22:50, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>> On Mar 22, 10:42 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22 Mrz., 22:31, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:14 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:> On 22 Mrz., 21:33, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>> <snip>>>>>>>>> this does not mean that one can do something>>>>>> that does not leave any of the lines of K>>>>>> and does not change the union of all lines.>>>>>>> That is clear>>>>>> So stop claiming your proof>>>> means you can do something>>>> that does not leave any of the lines>>>> of K and does not change the union>>>> of all the lines.>>>>> My proof is this: IF there is an actually infinite list of FISONs as I>>> devised it, THEN all lines can be removed without changing the union>>> of the lines.>>>> You have shown that any FISON and all preceding>> FISONs can be removed>> given the premise that set |N, the union of all FISONs, is "more" than> every FISON.>>>>> You have agreed that you have not shown you can do>> something  that does not leave a FISON>> and does not change the union of all the lines>> Yes. And you have approved my proof. But we know both that the result> is wrong, since the list cannot contain more than every line.>> This disproves the premise.This merely proves what WH said before concerningyour likes and dislikes."But we both know..."is not the same as"I have demonstrated how we know..."
```