Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers
 (extra-ordinary)
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 12:17:33 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <b7f357ab699a666d92da2a36021d0c8948232b1f@i2pn2.org>
References: <31419fde-62b3-46f3-89f6-a48f1fe82bc0@att.net>
 <vhpg51$13soc$1@dont-email.me> <vhpnrb$15239$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhs2gn$1kjtc$1@dont-email.me> <vhs4ue$1ku9t$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhv6or$280s6$1@dont-email.me> <vhvbjb$28n6o$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi1dbj$2moon$1@dont-email.me> <vi224l$2pgrd$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi4383$3csd4$2@dont-email.me> <vi4a6c$3dt4s$2@dont-email.me>
 <c5a03e73203e6409f6b50c25b84a22d8df0d210b@i2pn2.org>
 <vi4k5a$3fj1t$1@dont-email.me>
 <8b860c66587b6d5d18e565caddb42cc3d5bb813c@i2pn2.org>
 <vi4vg4$3hg8t$3@dont-email.me> <vi509b$3hqcp$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi56el$3is82$1@dont-email.me> <vi57p2$3j62u$1@dont-email.me>
 <vi6tu2$3v0dn$3@dont-email.me>
 <bedba0f79694c3adbbcb4eff22a28b9597ea1293@i2pn2.org>
 <vi7uam$5cmb$1@dont-email.me>
 <376546bee4809e20528e0e9481315611ec5c3848@i2pn2.org>
 <vi9n75$hepc$1@dont-email.me>
 <659cb7a16573c854e96c7a982fe8b15397fb1210@i2pn2.org>
 <vi9u2d$ig6a$1@dont-email.me>
 <566c43c9af9113a8654a25c54ff6d60fbe982784@i2pn2.org>
 <via4jv$jk72$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:17:33 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="343194"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <via4jv$jk72$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 4346
Lines: 61

On 11/28/24 11:09 AM, WM wrote:
> On 28.11.2024 16:50, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/28/24 9:17 AM, WM wrote:
>>> On 28.11.2024 14:01, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 11/28/24 7:20 AM, WM wrote:
>>>>> On 27.11.2024 22:20, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/27/24 3:09 PM, WM wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is completed! Every number 10n starts wit a black hat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right, and it gives that hat to n, so every number gets one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And, 10n will get back a hat from 100n, so it still have one at 
>>>>>> the end.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It seems so, but that is impossible. Up to every 10n, the interval 
>>>>> 1, 2, 3, ... 10n has a covering of 1/10 only. The limit of this 
>>>>> sequence is 1/10 too. And since this is true for all natural 
>>>>> numbers, where should additional hats come from?
>>>
>>>> No, it is possilbe,
>>>
>>> It is impossible that the sequence 1/10, 1/10, 1/10, ... has another 
>>> limit than 1/10.
> 
>> But that makes the error of a wrong category.
> No.

Sure it is, Infinte sets are difffent than finite sets.

> 
>> The properties of the infinte set is not just the properties of the 
>> series of the finite sets that approach it.
> 
> Maybe. In this case it is precisely this.
> 
> Look: If for all intervals 1, 2, 3, ..., n the covering is 1/10, then 
> there are no natnumbers outside of all intervals and there are no hats 
> outside of all intervals. Therefore only a fool could believe that 
> infinitely many black hats were supplied after all. If you wish to be a 
> fool you may claim that. My students would never come down that much.
> 
> Regards, WM

Just proving that you are ignorant of the fact that finite sets and 
infinite sets act diffferently.

The only sets you can handle are finite, so you can't imagine how an 
infinte set works.

It is sort of like trying to figure out what 0^0 is.

We can approach it like 0^x and see it must be 0, or we can approach it 
like x^0 and see it must be 1, and the issue is that there is no unique 
limit that gets us to that point.

Just like with the infinite set, there are multiple ways to envision 
getting to your final state, and they can have different answers, and 
thus their isn't actually a correct limit to it.

That is one of the funny things about infinite sets, you can get 
different limits to get to them, with different answers.