Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Chris M. Thomasson" Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:35:05 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 13 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 20:35:07 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0b3569b296defbc46d8f9f8c90c10f87"; logging-data="851934"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX181MN99Z6Zv9dwUoeH/ONSRNvP7jIV3r+8=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:KidM9rjaL/RPL4hF8arFqjwbWL0= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2151 On 3/16/2025 10:10 PM, WM wrote: > On 17.03.2025 00:19, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 3/16/2025 12:00 PM, WM wrote: > >>> No. The definable natural numbers strive to the smallest infinite >>> number ω. But they are never there. >> >> What is wrong with you? N is all the natural numbers. Saying all does >> not mean finite... Name a natural number that cannot be defined? > > The number next to ω cannot be defined. Any natural number can be defined...