Re: The set of necessary FISONs

On 2/19/25 9:28 AM, WM wrote:

Am 18.02.2025 um 17:45 schrieb joes:

Am Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:34:20 +0100 schrieb WM:

 

We can remove every FISON without changing the *assumed* union ℕ.

It doesn’t matter what you assume the union to be. You quite sensibly
denied that it is empty, yet you claim it would (not? I’m confused)
change.

 It is enough to show that the claimed union is mistaken.
Regards, WM
 

SInce the set you are "making" isn't defined as a set in a proper set theory, it doesn't prove anything.
The fact that you think induction makes a set, shows that you don't undetstand proper set theory.
Sorry, you are just revealing your utter stupidity and ignorance.