Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!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: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 07:55:29 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <d5a792258cc8380190a60c35cc1c15509cee3e2d@i2pn2.org>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$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>
 <1b6f89e7c35e4c9674af5a480e4bab6cb72e0915@i2pn2.org>
 <vkbalq$14tg7$2@dont-email.me>
 <733ce219e9d2422859035e5094a7b3e92eea9c47@i2pn2.org>
 <vke3bi$1q36j$2@dont-email.me>
 <93150cff37c76c7c9f6c66d8ffd13dc8bc5c477f@i2pn2.org>
 <vkjf3v$2umsm$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 12:55:30 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="542482"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <vkjf3v$2umsm$2@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3174
Lines: 38

On 12/26/24 6:36 AM, WM wrote:
> On 24.12.2024 15:06, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 12/24/24 5:45 AM, WM wrote:
>>> On 23.12.2024 15:32, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 12/23/24 4:31 AM, WM wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> No, I do as Cantor did.
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, you do what you THINK Cantor did,
>>>>>
>>>>> Show an n that I do not use with all intervals [1, n].
>>>
>>>> The LAST one, which you say must exist to use your logic.
>>>
>>> I do what Cantor did. There is no last one. You cannot show an n that 
>>> I do not use. There is none. Therefore all your arguing breaks down.
>>>
>> No, you do NOT do what Cantor did,
> 
> What n do I not use?
> 
> Regards, WM
> 

The LAST one, that completes the set.

Your logic insists on that, but you don't use it.

The fact that after any finite number of removals, there are still 
elements does not mean that when you remove *ALL* the elements there 
will still be some left.

Your logic just is using the wrong logic of the conditional you are 
claiming to be using, and thus the results do not hold.

Since your logic CAN'T complete, doing infinite work individually, it 
can't talk about the results when it does complete.

Sorry, you are just proving your stupidity.