Re: The set of necessary FISONs

On 2/18/25 4:53 AM, WM wrote:

On 18.02.2025 04:02, Richard Damon wrote:

On 2/17/25 2:25 PM, WM wrote:

 

A set without elements is an empty set and not capable of producing ℕ.

 

But an empty set of REQUIRED elements doesn't mean we can't have a set of sufficient elements.

 There is no element that could be a meaningful member of any sufficient set. Therefore there is no sufficient set.
 Regards, WM
 

Of course there are, its just they are not individually needed, but are collectively sufficient.
You just don't understand what you are talking about, because you refuse to even try to understand the meaning of the logic you are trying to use (but failing, because all you really know is Naive logic, that just fails).