well-founded floundering

[Marc LeBrun]

 >Jon Awbrey
 >i know we have a proof that all numbers are interesting --
 >so long as "number" means something in a well-founded set.

AND so long as you also accept that a sufficient condition to be 
interesting is merely to be the smallest member of some set!

Rejecting this removes that annoying chestnut from under your mattress, 
healthfully promoting sounder sleep (one can finally lose interest in those 
parading numbered sheep!)

 > but i forget, is our space of sequences well-founded?

I don't know.  But since the entire set of all sequences is uncountable I'm 
hoping there'll be a *lot* of interesting submissions, if only to see what 
kind of A-labels Neil will assign after he runs out of integers!