| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<hPCcnTA3LPD80-n6nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 20:04:49 +0000 Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary, effectively) Newsgroups: sci.math References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me> <vk23m7$31l8v$1@dont-email.me> <bce1b27d-170c-4385-8938-36805c983c49@att.net> <vk693m$f52$2@dont-email.me> <a17eb8b6-7d11-4c59-b98c-b4d5de8358ca@att.net> <vk7dmb$7mh2$2@dont-email.me> <b72490c1-e61a-4c23-a3a5-f624b2c084e4@att.net> <vk8tbq$j9h1$1@dont-email.me> <bd7dfdc7-6471-4fe6-b078-0ca739031580@att.net> <vklumc$3htmt$1@dont-email.me> <c03cf79d-0572-4b19-ad92-a0d12df53db9@att.net> <n9CdnR02SsevtPL6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> <45a632ed-26cc-4730-a8dd-1e504d6df549@att.net> <vkpa98$dofu$2@dont-email.me> <3d2fe306aa299bc78e94c14dadd21645d8db9829@i2pn2.org> <vkr8sq$t59a$2@dont-email.me> <d4669f26483b01c8a43dfd3ac4b61ab4a42bf551@i2pn2.org> <vksikk$17fjt$1@dont-email.me> <aa2941e93e806f1dda55d563dd062db67eb879f1@i2pn2.org> <vktmi3$1ia1u$1@dont-email.me> <c46775b30460bc564b3fe7bd1b838713829024f8@i2pn2.org> <vkv3t1$1qb93$1@dont-email.me> <2163aa0c0efba66c813e8ebda5ef5ece6d19ea34@i2pn2.org> <vl1901$2b0qi$1@dont-email.me> From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 12:04:51 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <vl1901$2b0qi$1@dont-email.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <hPCcnTA3LPD80-n6nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> Lines: 57 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-qLqtdG31MKAnLw6KUzNispP7vRQ8QKwz/DZBD7iemhZBQkib8rKatgWQIMm/rkA61lypxqqw0SRQTts!IwMS54hXvwP2SQFGTApPR+OioVn+blHublRZYFRGjMISwdYXvaIGi1G+BxmUHwn9I1QTDIWrtRQ= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 4111 On 12/31/2024 09:17 AM, FromTheRafters wrote: > Richard Damon was thinking very hard : >> On 12/30/24 4:38 PM, WM wrote: >>> On 30.12.2024 17:08, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 12/30/24 3:44 AM, WM wrote: >>>>> On 30.12.2024 01:36, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 12/29/24 5:31 PM, WM wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> My theorem: Every union of FISONs which stay below a certain >>>>>>> threshold stays below that threshold. >>>>>>> Find a counterexample. Don't claim it but prove it. Fail. >>>>> >>>>>> But what does that prove? >>>>> >>>>> That proves the existence of dark numbers. >>>> >>>> How? >>>> >>>> It shows that there are numbers you didn't look at, but you admit to >>>> not looking at all the numbers. >>> >>> Neither can you look at more numbers. >> >> Of course I can look at "more" numbers, as I can look at the one after >> where you stopped. >> >>>> >>>>>> The finite numbers are finite, and that is it. >>>>> >>>>> FISONs do not grow by unioning them. All FISONs and their unions >>>>> stay below 1 % of ℕ. >>> >>>>> Proof: Every FISON that is multiplied by 100 remains a FISON that >>>>> can be multiplied by 100 without changing this property. >>>>> >>>>> If ℕ is an actually infinite set then it is not made by FISONs. >>> >>> That is what I have been telling you for a long time. >> >> But there is no Natural Number that isn't in a FISON, which is NOT >> what you have been saying. >> >> You don't seem to understand the difference between a set and its >> members. > > He has in the past explicitly stated such. Something like 'a set is > nothing more than its elements' -- I don't think he has changed his tune. Sets are defined by their elements, then though all the relations of sets are defined by all the relations of sets, in set theory, a theory with one relation, elt. Then there's class/set distinction, that's another fine point ignored by all inductive bots.