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