Date: Mar 25, 2013 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224
WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 25 Mrz., 21:09, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > > Why should any FISON be left?
> > Every natural is in at least one FISON, so without at least one FISON
> > in that set of only FISONs there is nothing to contain ANY natuals.
> That is so in potential infinity.
I neither know nor care what WM claims goes on in his Wolkenmuekenheim.
But in standard mathematics, what I said above is true, a set of FISONs
containing no FISONs means a union of no naturals.
> There is no sequence that is larger
> than every FISON, but only for every FISON, there is a larger one.
> But in actual infinity, there is a sequence that is larger than every
True, but it is not a FISON.
> But in effect every FISON fails to empty |N.
No one FISON does,
nor do even finitely many of them,
but all infinitely many of them, collectively, do.
At least everywhere outside Wolkenmuekenheim.