This is similar to the following question:

Is there a positive integer that does not have an accurate semantic definition in english of less than 100 characters? (i.e. "The first number", "The first prime", "The third perfect square", etc.)

Proof that there is no such number:

Suppose there were. Construct a list of all the numbers that don't have an accurate english semantic definition in less than 100 characters. The first of these can be accurately defined as "The first number that does not have an accurate english semantic definition in less than 100 characters", a contradiction. :-P