Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<uv6mrh$14d6q$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: Contradiction of bijections as a measure for infinite sets Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 11:47:13 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 14 Message-ID: <uv6mrh$14d6q$1@dont-email.me> References: <qHqKnNhkFFpow5Tl3Eiz12-8JEI@jntp> <56fdf4ac-fed6-4c64-96e1-0c11e62df55f@att.net> <6VFp9Pr9I394XSyRAi0w-GMz2GY@jntp> <373b543f-be44-4441-b9d3-9fdb44287e95@att.net> <ymJoogUCploI4Stcei3A4L4PLPg@jntp> <fa45fae3-33bd-495d-8415-07804b36f6f8@att.net> <780i3eKdKZ5P_9FaZ1WI-mHhUTs@jntp> <a91c158a-b4eb-405f-bf7d-7704d7fb171b@att.net> <3eWOtn8set0bbtkUXb-j7rUUTKk@jntp> <7acd4175-a69c-4d36-ad23-5bf952f8e6ea@att.net> <Pf_iGWdEzYuR1oKepOXxD-daK7M@jntp> <uv4g8q$jm4l$1@i2pn2.org> <uv4h87$gafg$3@dont-email.me> <uv51hf$nnc2$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 20:47:13 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1e0154287d270c974cd6798ddf950547"; logging-data="1193178"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18bCMscYoR3Oeds+nTKU2sQLIlqFFv4J/Q=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:hLfZPsH0Lu9FrJ+2KPF9AQMXqLM= In-Reply-To: <uv51hf$nnc2$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2160 On 4/9/2024 8:37 PM, Moebius wrote: > Am 10.04.2024 um 00:59 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >> On 4/9/2024 3:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > >>> Multiplying ANY Natural numbers (which are all finite) by two, >>> results in another finite Natural Number. >> >> Right! And this new natural number is already in the set of all >> natural numbers. Why can't WM get this! God damn. > > His brain (or "mind") can't deal with (the concept of) "ininite sets", > that's why. It's clearly a mental deficiency. I have to concur... :^)