OFFENSIVE TITLE

HIGHLY OFFENSIVE RANT ABOUT HASKELL

AUTISM

MORE AUTISM

EVEN MORE AUTISM

OHGOD AUTISM EVERYWHERE

LISP

LISP IS GOOD

LISP IS BETTER THAN EVERYTHING YOU BELIEVE IN

LISP GIVES ME A RAGING BONER

I WANT TO MARRY LISP

OH LORD IN HEAVEN I LOVE LISP SO MUCH I WOULD KILL MYSELF FOR LISP

ALSO EMACS

WINDOWS IS PIG DISGUSTING

I AM USING SOLARIS BECAUSE I KNOWS TEH LUNIX

AND TOTALLY NOT BECAUSE I AM FUCKING STUCK AT MY JOB AS SERVER ADMINISTRATOR (ALSO A RONERY FAGGOT)

>>87
So, seeing a single finite cell id, that there is an "infinte set" number of such cells? Nice inference!
Except you have a rule which lets you produce the next element.
Let's try it like this:


0 == 0
1 == (1+ 0)
2 == (1+ 1) == (1+ (1+ 0))
3 == (1+ 2) == (1+ (1+ 1)) == (1+ (1+ (1+ (1+ 0))))
...


That is Pascal's Waget at its best! You should believe in X, because X can exist. Also "can exist" is a little ambiguous quality.
Pascal's Wager claims that you should change your behavior because of some possible arbitrary rule might exist. My answer to it is that both said arbitrary rule and the opposite of that rule can exist thus the change in behavior is not warranted.