Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers
 (extra-ordinary)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 15:01:38 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <0366b93ff0e858f4eb676c0bea61e5ab713e1cd7@i2pn2.org>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me> <vi41rg$3cj8q$1@dont-email.me>
	<d124760c-9ff9-479f-b687-482c108adf68@att.net>
	<vi56or$3j04f$1@dont-email.me>
	<4a810760-86a1-44bb-a191-28f70e0b361b@att.net>
	<vi6uc3$3v0dn$4@dont-email.me>
	<b2d7ee1f-33ab-44b6-ac90-558ac2f768a7@att.net> <vi7tnf$4oqa$1@dont-email.me>
	<23311c1a-1487-4ee4-a822-cd965bd024a0@att.net>
	<e9eb6455-ed0e-43f6-9a53-61aa3757d22d@tha.de>
	<71758f338eb239b7419418f49dfd8177c59d778b@i2pn2.org>
	<via83s$jk72$2@dont-email.me> <viag8h$lvep$1@dont-email.me>
	<viaj9q$l91n$1@dont-email.me> <vibvfo$10t7o$1@dont-email.me>
	<vic6m9$11mrq$4@dont-email.me> <vicbp2$1316h$1@dont-email.me>
	<vid4ts$1777k$2@dont-email.me> <vidcv3$18pdu$1@dont-email.me>
	<bdbc0e3d-1db2-4d6a-9f71-368d36d96b40@tha.de> <vier32$1madr$1@dont-email.me>
	<vierv5$1l1ot$2@dont-email.me> <viiqfd$2qq41$5@dont-email.me>
	<vik73d$3a9jm$1@dont-email.me> <vikg6c$3c4tu$1@dont-email.me>
	<9bcc128b-dea8-4397-9963-45c93d1c14c7@att.net>
	<vimvgd$3vv5r$9@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 15:01:38 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1091866"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2919
Lines: 26

Am Tue, 03 Dec 2024 14:02:05 +0100 schrieb WM:
> On 03.12.2024 01:32, Jim Burns wrote:
>> On 12/2/2024 9:28 AM, WM wrote:
> 
>> A quantifier shift tells you (WM) what you (WM) _expect_
>>   but a quantifier shift is untrustworthy.
> Here is no quantifier shift but an identity:
This is an equality:
>>> E(1), E(2), E(3), ...
>>> and E(1), E(1)∩E(2), E(1)∩E(2)∩E(3), ...
>>> are identical for every n and in the limit because E(1)∩E(2)∩...∩E(n)
>>> = E(n).
> 
>> No.
>> For the set of finite cardinals,
>> EVEN IF NO END.SEGMENT IS EMPTY,
>>   the intersection of all end segments is empty.
> I cannot read or understand the above. The following is gibberish.
>> ⎜ EVEN IF NO END.SEGMENT IS EMPTY,
>> ⎝  the intersection of all end segments is empty.
> E(1)∩E(2)∩...∩E(n) = E(n).
> Sequences which are identical in every term have identical limits.
That limit being the empty set.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.