Re: Simple enough for every reader?

On 2025-06-10 17:06:18 +0000, WM said:

On 08.06.2025 07:10, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-06 10:47:33 +0000, WM said:
 

On 06.06.2025 09:37, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-05 20:36:45 +0000, WM said:
 

On 05.06.2025 09:32, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-04 17:32:28 +0000, WM said:

 

The expression "subtracting them individually" should be represented
mathematically, e.g. a sequence. Informal expressions tend to lead
to bad proofs.

 This expression is represented by
 ((((ℕ \ {1}) \ {2}) \ {3}) ...) = { }

 That may be good enough when you want to prove something that we already
believe anyway. But for a sufficiently rigorous proof of something else
the "..." should be replaced with something more mathematicsl.

 The "..." can be replaced with the singletons of definable natural numbers

 Then do so.

 See above. Three are already given. More can be inserted. But it is impossible to replace them with all natural numbers.

I can see that you stll have no rigorous proofs, and can't have as you
apparently can't even write your claim without "..." and other informal
expressions.
--
Mikko