Date: Apr 6, 2013 12:45 PM
Author: mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 6 Apr., 18:34, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 6, 1:01 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > On 6 Apr., 12:02, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 6, 11:42 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
> > > > On 5 Apr., 23:50, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Then G has an infinite number of
> > > > > elements, but you cannot name a single element of G.-

>
> > > > In D\E we have another situation. If someone claims that D\E contains
> > > > an element e, then we can prove that it is not an element of D\E by
> > > > induction, since E is an inductive set. This makes D\E being the empty
> > > > set.

>
> > > Nope, we are not in Wolkenmuekenheim. E does not change.
>
> > Then you should not dare to name one of the elements of D\E.
> > I would immediately be able to prove that it is not in D\E.

>
> Tell me which E you want to use.  I will
> name an element that is  in D\E.


I will not leave any line that has a follower, i.e., I will use all
finite lines (given that "all lines" is a meaningful notion for
infinite sets.)

But since the present thread has become too long and too noisy with
unrelated discussions, please look into § 238. There I have already
accepted your position.

Regards, WM