Re: Simple enough for every reader?

On 19.05.2025 00:41, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de> writes:
 

Are you aware of the fact that in
>
{1}
{1, 2}
{1, 2, 3}
...
{1, 2, 3, ..., n}
...
>
up to every n infinitely many natural numbers of the whole set
>
{1, 2, 3, ...}
>
are missing? Infinitely many of them will never be mentioned
individually. They are dark.

 Presumably you are aware that for every n in ℕ, n will be mentioned in
infinitely many such sets?

For every n that can be mentioned.

They are bathed in light.

{1} has infinitely many (ℵo) successors.
If {1, 2, 3, ..., n} has infinitely many (ℵo) successors, then {1, 2, 3, ..., n, n+1} has infinitely many (ℵo) successors. For every n that can be defied. See?  But you are too biased and fanatic to accept mathematical proof by induction.

 Do they still let you teach this stuff?

I am one of the few Professors worldwide who do teach the correct view of infinity (if actual infinity exists at all).
Regards, WM