Date: Mar 23, 2013 5:12 PM
Author: Tanu R.
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

William Hughes schrieb:

> On Mar 23, 4:15 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>> On 23 Mrz., 15:01, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

>>> On Mar 23, 2:43 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>>
>>> > On 23 Mrz., 10:31, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > We both agree that you have not shown that we can
>>> > > do something which leaves no lines and does not
>>> > > change the union.

>>
>>> > No, of course we do not.
>>
>>> WH: this does not mean that one can do something
>>> WH: that does not leave any of the lines of K
>>> WH: and does not change the union of all lines.

>>
>>> WM: That is clear
>>
>> Please complete this sentence: "That is clear because my proof rests
>> upon the premise that actual infinity is a meaningful notion."
>>
>> If actual infinity was existing as a meaningful notion, then we could
>> remove all finite lines without changin the union in any way.

>
> nope
> actual infinity existing as a meaningful notion, does not mean
> we could remove all finite lines without changing the union
> in any way.
>
> You have agreed that, "under the assumption that actual
> infinity is a meaningful notion"
> you have not shown that we could remove all finite lines
> without changing the union in any way.


Its always the same natural idiocy which belongs to the abhoring
ignorant WM so each set in mathematics needs to be "constructed"
before they "really exist" which is why this asshole feels entitled
to expect something like a process of "reverse construction" and
which "must be implied" in a the "natural way" that WM feels being
the only "really truth" so the imbecile WM thinks to "win" by
"decomposing" infinite sets into finite ones.