Date: Apr 4, 2013 3:47 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224

In article 
WM <> wrote:

> Piffle. Induction is valid for all elements of the inductive set.

Let WM try to give a formal statement of what he means by he inductive
principle, then show that that principle supports his own position.

He cannot do so!

Either WM's statement of the inductive principle will be corrupt or
his application of it will be.

Cantor's diagonal argument says that any listing of infinite binary
sequences must be incomplete because on can for any listing construct a
non-member of that list.

Neither WM, nor anyone else, has manages a valid counter-argument.

Note that claiming that no infinite binary sequences can exist supports
the argument, as does a claim that any such listing is necessarily

Thus WM's claim of non-existence of actual infiniteness SUPPORTS the
Cantor argument.