Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: The set of necessary FISONs
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 07:37:02 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <c0b77f4a0cb388e7629ad8ba11fdffbd400c42cd@i2pn2.org>
References: <vmo1bs$1rnl$1@dont-email.me> <vnsp4h$1phsq$1@dont-email.me>
 <faae7d60-6287-4734-87d8-091c3c3e0aa3@att.net> <vnva5b$2al9b$1@dont-email.me>
 <1ab7ff67-f1fb-4814-9d28-c883a4756097@att.net> <vo07bf$2fh7t$1@dont-email.me>
 <451804be-c49f-43ab-bca9-8a4af406d945@att.net> <vo0di8$2fh7t$2@dont-email.me>
 <aaeb6a0f-0a2c-41ee-aecd-24d1532da5eb@att.net> <vo1tbc$2sgko$1@dont-email.me>
 <11e634bd-c1d3-4d72-9e18-be6ca22b4742@att.net> <vo2pit$31hlr$1@dont-email.me>
 <aa038824-04c7-4fde-87f4-b9c3316d30a1@att.net> <vo32p6$3393i$1@dont-email.me>
 <999fb07e-7bef-4423-afeb-a08922613c65@att.net> <vo5cvb$3hukd$1@dont-email.me>
 <be2d9f3e-be38-451a-8598-de19a949cf1e@att.net> <vo7c1q$7ne$3@dont-email.me>
 <0d24c3fd-cd63-4e21-9dd4-ab1360560b09@att.net>
 <cc879e12-d325-48b6-be78-87b8b36cb50d@att.net> <vo8jr7$7mh2$2@dont-email.me>
 <79920977-902d-4f59-a11c-497383221c82@att.net> <voa1r5$ib75$1@dont-email.me>
 <468b9c37-ba93-485c-8685-4b320e168251@att.net> <vocig1$15cth$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 12:37:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3576491"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vocig1$15cth$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2918
Lines: 33

On 2/10/25 4:56 AM, WM wrote:
> On 09.02.2025 18:20, Jim Burns wrote:
>> On 2/9/2025 5:59 AM, WM wrote:
> 
>>>> minimal.inductive ≠ inductive ≠ infinite
>>>
>>> Then you are wrong.
>>> Every inductive set is infinite.
>>
>> Some infinite sets, such as E(137),
>> are not inductive.
> 
> That is irrelevant.
>>
>> Also,
>> some inductive sets, such as ℝ,
>> are not minimal.inductive.
> 
> That is irrelevant.
> 
> The set of useless FISONs is inductive and therefore infinite. No FISON 
> can change the assumption U(A(n)) = ℕ. Therefore every FISON can be 
> omitted. ==> { } = ℕ.
> 
> Regards, WM
> 

Which means that each element is not needed, but doesn't prove that you 
can't get the answer from a union of an infinite set of them.

Sorry, but you just don't understand your claims, in part because you 
are using just Naive Logic from Naive Math, and using Naive set theory 
to prove a falsehood, because your whole system blew itself up on the 
contradictions in the system.