>>13316281Wildberger already explained this neatly as follows.
The largest finite number N is the number that comes just before the
smallest number N+1 that does not exist.
It is obvious from common sense that there exist numbers so large that
they cannot exist, because you cannot write them without running out of
writing material. And N+1 happens to be the smallest such number in
existence.
Now, an ignorant schizo retard might ask, hey, how can N+1 exist
when N is the largest number that exists??
But Wildberger strikes with his superior intellect and +250 IQ.
When we write numbers as usual, we use base 10, so that 10 means ten
and 11 means eleven, and so on. What you have to prove to show that
the smallest number N+1 that does not exist actually does exist is to change
your notation to base N instead of base 10. Then 10 means N and 11 means N+1. This
proves that N+1 exists, because now you can write it down. And it is clear by
common sense that things exist if you can write them down.
