Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: FromTheRafters <FTR@nomail.afraid.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary, effectively)
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2025 06:26:11 -0500
Organization: Peripheral Visions
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <vldq8l$10kje$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me>   <3d2fe306aa299bc78e94c14dadd21645d8db9829@i2pn2.org> <vkr8sq$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> <vl1bp4$2bcos$2@dont-email.me> <ac6061d7f9963a83c7a67f474fe9cb835c98cf5b@i2pn2.org> <vl5tvs$39tus$1@dont-email.me> <9387e323873e24f0a57b8daa49579d9a1c517563@i2pn2.org> <vl6i2u$3ecap$2@dont-email.me> <89598d353b5737d5cbfabd1cde31c797a212e13d@i2pn2.org> <vl7f50$3jdl8$2@dont-email.me> <vl7ftq$3jcou$2@dont-email.me> <vl88fp$3qtjc$2@dont-email.me> <7595ac4af886b0ab3c0f5fe6bcbcbce6103e78aa@i2pn2.org> <vl9lpu$3796$4@dont-email.me> <vlbufp$ifig$3@dont-email.me> <vldnrr$vlag$3@dont-email.me> <vldp8v$10dv7$1@dont-email.me> <vldq3p$vlag$5@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: erratic.howard@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2025 12:26:14 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e1e6c9a77e924c83341a9ffd2fd9359a";
	logging-data="1069678"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19MyVee9lZQNxK3FVWmFOoIz1QuUs7eTWM="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8cR2uTOx0hXPYnz4Q+um7VFHNhE=
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb
X-ICQ: 1701145376
Bytes: 2894

WM has brought this to us :
> On 05.01.2025 12:09, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> WM wrote :
>>> On 04.01.2025 19:26, Moebius wrote:
>
>>> That is not an example but a silly claim contradicted by my theorem. My 
>>> theorem is proved by the fact that nothing is in the union which could 
>>> make it larger than all elements in the union.
>>>>
>
>>> Every union of FISONs which stay below a certain threshold stays below 
>>> that threshold.
>>>
>>>> So the union of (the set of) _all_ FISONs does NOT "stay below" IN, 
>>>> though each and every FISON does.
>>>
>>> Your matheologial belief is outside of mathematics and does not deserve 
>>> further discussion.
>> 
>> Then STFU and go away.
>
> It could be that not all set theorists are that stultified. Maybe I can save 
> some of them from this counter logical belief.

If it doesn't warrant any discussion, then it doesn't.