@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ For every $n$, we obtain a proof that $\melt \mincl{n} \meltB$.

From this, we could extract a sequence of witnesses $(\meltC_m)_{m}$, and we need to arrive at a single witness $\meltC$ showing that $\melt\leq\meltB$.

Without the division operator, there is no reason to believe that such a witness exists.

However, since we can use the division operator, and since we know that this operator is \emph{non-expansive}, we can pick $\meltC\eqdef\meltB\mdiv\melt$, and then we can prove that this is indeed the desired witness.

\ralf{Do we actually need this property anywhere?}

\ralf{The only reason we actually have division is that we are working constructively \emph{and}, at the same time, remain compatible with a classic interpretation of the existential. This is pretty silly.}