Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers
 (extra-ordinary)
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 20:01:15 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <1b6f89e7c35e4c9674af5a480e4bab6cb72e0915@i2pn2.org>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me>
 <e11a34c507a23732d83e3d0fcde7b609cdaf3ade@i2pn2.org>
 <vjmse3$k2go$2@dont-email.me>
 <069069bf23698c157ddfd9b62b9b2f632b484c40@i2pn2.org>
 <vjooeq$11n0g$2@dont-email.me>
 <2d3620a6e2a8a57d9db7a33c9d476fe03cac455b@i2pn2.org>
 <vjrfcc$1m1b2$1@dont-email.me>
 <3c08ed64fa6193dc9ab6733b807a5c99a49810aa@i2pn2.org>
 <vjss56$1tr00$2@dont-email.me>
 <357a8740434fb6f1b847130ac3afbd33c850fc37@i2pn2.org>
 <vjv6fb$2dujf$2@dont-email.me>
 <b0c7449413fec43bc18e8d2d67da1c779a350bc2@i2pn2.org>
 <vk1cad$2srst$1@dont-email.me>
 <ceaaf003457afd2e381c8f115a4e691611162ffe@i2pn2.org>
 <vk3g0l$3cjvc$3@dont-email.me> <vk3lv1$3e9se$1@dont-email.me>
 <vk3vh6$3g0a3$1@dont-email.me> <vk4jfi$3k04r$4@dont-email.me>
 <d4d38bb75acc471a684759922b8f8d32707855a8@i2pn2.org>
 <vk6uu7$4f7v$1@dont-email.me>
 <cdd51ad73c172f40f3212801d7afd9eef8e60d47@i2pn2.org>
 <vk936n$khia$1@dont-email.me>
 <787067e5de3c455cb57389315b6821e96bcf86af@i2pn2.org>
 <f713f771-6cdd-44bb-90ab-7300d739f84b@tha.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 01:01:16 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4188888"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <f713f771-6cdd-44bb-90ab-7300d739f84b@tha.de>
Bytes: 2881
Lines: 26

On 12/22/24 5:11 PM, WM wrote:
> On 22.12.2024 20:10, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 12/22/24 8:11 AM, WM wrote:
> 
>>> Find a natural number that is not in all intervals [1, n] which I use:
>>> ∀n ∈ ℕ [1, n].
>>
>> But you can't use *ALL* intervals, becaue you need to use them 
>> individually
> 
> No, I do as Cantor did.
> 
> Regards, WM

No, you do what you THINK Cantor did, but you don't understand what he 
did, because you can't understand the infiite.

This shows by the fact that you find the need to alter what he does to 
something different that you do understand, that you think is the same, 
but isn't actually, because it is rooted in logic that only works for 
finite sets.

Sorry, if you think that you are doing EXACTLY as Cantor did, you are 
just an idiot.

If you think it is ok to be different by still say you are doing the 
same thing, you are just a stupid liar.