Date: Jun 12, 2013 12:09 PM
Author: Tucsondrew@me.com
Subject: Re: Matheology § 285

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 6:59:09 AM UTC-7, muec...@rz.fh-augsburg.de wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 June 2013 02:06:39 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote:
>
>
>

> > I doubt, WM can prove his A then B then A then ... algorithm satisfies that requirement. I will working proving it can't. ZG
>
>
>
> I doubt I want to "prove" that. I have "proved" that all rationals can be ordered by size "if they all exist". This yields a contradiction. Why prove anything else on that obviously broken basis?
>


You haven't proved that!
You claim your algorithm is such a proof,
But it fails.

>
> Regards, WM


ZG