Date: Apr 5, 2013 4:52 PM
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224
On 5 Apr., 22:06, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> On 4/5/2013 11:22 AM, WM wrote:
> > On 5 Apr., 12:08, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> More precisely. There is an infinite set of lines D
> >> such that any finite subset of D can be removed.
> > How do you call a subset of D that has no fixed last element?
> In set theory it is neither a set or a subset
In set theory a set can either be bijected with a FISON or not.
> because the question does not make sense.
A subset of D that can be removed without changing the union of the
remaining elements of D can be defined and makes sense.
Examples are the list D
and the subset of the first n lines for every n in |N.
So the question makes sense.
> One might compare the remark to a generic set
> of forcing conditions described by the
> information content of their initial sequences.
No claptrap, please. The definition is clear: We consider any subset
of D that can be removed without changing the union of the remaining
elements of D. Does the remaining set of lines have a first line-
Do you reject the theorem that every non-empty set of natural numbers
has a first element? Do you reject proofs by infinite descente? Do you
reject mathematics in favour of matheology?