Date: Apr 6, 2013 5:00 PM
Author: Virgil
Subject: Re: Matheology � 224
In article

<2f4db1f9-e927-403a-aed8-fb7e0005f359@c7g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>,

WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:

> 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 the union of all finite lines is D as each finite line is a FIS of D>

>

--