Date: Mar 22, 2013 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: WMytheology � 224
WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 22 Mrz., 21:33, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 7:21 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Line l_n and all its predecessors do not in any way influenturece (neither
> > > decrease nor increase) the union of all lines, namely |N.
> > Yes, given any set of lines K, every element of K has
> > the property that it can be removed without changing
> > the union of all lines. Yes, the set of lines that
> > has this property is the complete set K.
> No doubt.
> > This is the result of your proof.
> Given the premise is valid.
What premise? Unless WM will not state all his premises, he will
continue to be unable to show anything to be valid, or invalid.
> > No, 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 because my proof
WM does not nave any proofs, since proofs require premises to be known
and WM will not make all of his premises known.
> Of course not. The premise is actual infinity. That is obviously not
> possible in finite sets.
> > but it is something
> > you do not like, not a contradiction.
That WM assumes something does not make it true anywhere outside