Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 11:04:33 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <vh76bi$3bnde$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me> <vghuoc$2j3sg$1@dont-email.me>
 <d79e791d-d670-4a5a-bd26-fdf72bcde6bc@att.net> <vgj4lk$2ova9$3@dont-email.me>
 <f154138e-4482-4267-9332-151e2fd9f1ba@att.net> <vgkoi7$b5pp$1@solani.org>
 <6d9f3b10-47ad-459c-9536-098ce91f514b@att.net> <vgni02$3osmc$1@dont-email.me>
 <16028da0-456b-47ad-8baa-7982a7cbdf10@att.net> <vgpupb$abrr$2@dont-email.me>
 <fc4df00f-96d1-402f-89d2-739cb8ddd863@att.net> <vgsg04$t7fk$1@dont-email.me>
 <1fca3a53-1cb4-4fd2-85b6-85e9b69ca23b@att.net> <vgtpmo$153hf$6@dont-email.me>
 <d17f7542-986e-4897-89b4-dccaf11d5311@att.net> <vh00jj$1m6co$1@dont-email.me>
 <97304048-24f5-4625-82a7-d17427f2f6e3@att.net> <vh0hta$1pmql$1@dont-email.me>
 <65febd06-662b-4fa4-9aa8-f7353a79a110@att.net> <vh2k9p$29cql$1@dont-email.me>
 <157a949d-6c19-4693-8cee-9e067268ae45@att.net> <vh35nd$2d81g$1@dont-email.me>
 <cb0c9917-09a9-45f0-8fe9-cd059fa82dde@att.net> <vh4itg$2o3vu$1@dont-email.me>
 <8165b44b-1ba5-429d-8317-0b043b214b53@att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 11:04:34 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5be5ddc0cd157e179a3380074c75b3ad";
	logging-data="3530158"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/woyD/mCo05dRO8l0MrUZ/CfvVtpLXnB0="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UBY2oGsA2RvrsIcvqAsgaM1VjoA=
In-Reply-To: <8165b44b-1ba5-429d-8317-0b043b214b53@att.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2726

On 14.11.2024 19:31, Jim Burns wrote:
> On 11/14/2024 5:20 AM, WM wrote:

>> Here is a single claim which is true:
> 
> You don't say what reason you (WM) have
> for knowing that that single claim is true.

It can be proven for every finite geometric figure that covering it by 
small pieces or intervals does not depend on the individuality and 
therefore on the order of the pieces.
That means if there is a configuration where the figure is not covered 
completely, every possible shuffling will also fail.

For infinite figures we use the analytical limit as is normal in 
mathematics.

Example:
XOOO...
XOOO...
XOOO...
XOOO...
....
One X per line is a density which can never be increased by reordering.

Regards, WM