Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: WM Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: The set of necessary FISONs Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:49:34 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 34 Message-ID: References: <685c1274-e22f-409d-b39c-c3a5430c2f57@att.net> <69f56ce0-08a2-4614-b102-e333175c643d@att.net> <9a88665f-211f-4260-b585-97c72c7b6d1b@att.net> <8bed122d8b355eff96158e6f5cb76cffcc42925c@i2pn2.org> <7a26856916099747e76314a2b4c79693e14426fd@i2pn2.org> <98baf83e-820e-4e1b-be2c-e5ea4802683d@att.net> <0876c2b9-2144-44c1-a26b-20176f5e2127@att.net> <067f772a-4f4c-4c27-8042-3f605f814876@att.net> <26691e26-a27e-4c03-bc3d-29aa9fd825bc@att.net> <1bf6d76c-e7f0-4514-9271-d53945c095c0@att.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:49:36 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="356e11fa35ac2c14a6072e21beb6560b"; logging-data="1985354"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19tglcOGYbeYqj/IOUylsgItr0ntT5OyLA=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:afr06FmuZ15Vzdegw7v78QDEBe4= In-Reply-To: <1bf6d76c-e7f0-4514-9271-d53945c095c0@att.net> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2861 On 24.02.2025 19:25, Jim Burns wrote: > On 2/24/2025 12:10 PM, WM wrote: > In the present framework, > you (WM) confuse a claim about each FISON in {F} > with a claim about {F}. I never talked about {F}. > >> Zermelo creates all natural numbers by induction >> and by that guarantees the existence of the set ℕ. > > I guarantee that Zermelo was a finite being > and that, as such, he did not perform any supertask. Therefore he used induction. > > The existence of the set which > is its.own.only.inductive.subset > is proven from Zermelo's axioms. > We call that set ℕ. Defined by induction. > >>> {1,2}\{1,{2}} = {2} >> >> Only such nonsense available? > > I'll grant you that it's trivial. > You (WM) have made it necessary to cover this. No.Your massive misunderstanding shows up above. I never used {ℕ} or {F}. Regards, WM