Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Simple enough for every reader?
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 08:38:57 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <906094b4267666e80b6ffd5cfb7a29eac0c84bc7@i2pn2.org>
References: <100a8ah$ekoh$1@dont-email.me> <102ug2t$35ekh$1@dont-email.me>
	<1030dft$3obvv$1@dont-email.me> <10315us$3tqn8$2@dont-email.me>
	<1033805$lvet$1@dont-email.me> <1033ks9$1075$1@dont-email.me>
	<10360hf$10lrl$1@dont-email.me> <10365va$11afj$3@dont-email.me>
	<1038it5$epe7$1@dont-email.me> <1039873$jtod$1@dont-email.me>
	<103b13q$14dr9$1@dont-email.me> <103bc1r$17360$2@dont-email.me>
	<103dqb3$1u2kv$1@dont-email.me> <103engv$25bv0$1@dont-email.me>
	<103g9t2$2l4am$1@dont-email.me> <103hkv3$2voqr$1@dont-email.me>
	<103j7qu$3dl3j$1@dont-email.me> <103jgq9$3fje0$1@dont-email.me>
	<103lhgp$11qu$1@dont-email.me> <103mrsa$b011$1@dont-email.me>
	<103oe8v$ppfi$1@dont-email.me> <103osb9$sphe$1@dont-email.me>
	<103r4a7$1fl13$1@dont-email.me> <103ukik$2ahp0$1@dont-email.me>
	<1042o2k$3d5cj$1@dont-email.me> <1043dg5$3hor7$1@dont-email.me>
	<1045itl$3le8$1@dont-email.me> <1045vc8$5pd6$1@dont-email.me>
	<979729b53f91bd779898f5241ca32cbb609f8ac5@i2pn2.org>
	<1046kjf$ak00$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 08:38:57 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3303740"; 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

Am Thu, 03 Jul 2025 21:10:39 +0200 schrieb WM:
> On 03.07.2025 16:12, joes wrote:
>> Am Thu, 03 Jul 2025 15:08:25 +0200 schrieb WM:
> 
>>> The rule of subset proves that every proper subset has fewer elements
>> No such rule for infinite sets.
> For all sets.
No, this is not an accepted theorem of mainstream mathematics.

>>> than its superset. So there are more natural numbers than prime
>>> numbers,
>> No, you can number the primes.
> Yes, there are only few known primes.
....you can enumerate them in the sense of a bijection to N:
there is a first prime, a second and so on for every natural,
which is infinitely many.

>>> The rule of construction yields the number of integers |Z| = 2|N| + 1
>>> and the number of fractions |Q| = 2|N|^2 + 1.
>> Those numbers are equal.
> Only for cranks. In mathematics we use the limit. For every large enough
> interval the even numbers are half as many as the natural numbers. This
> does never change. Consequently it holds in the limit for infinite sets.
And half of infinity is still infinite.

-- 
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.