Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!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
 (extra-ordinary)
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:00:04 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <vliqej$24c50$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me>
 <c03cf79d-0572-4b19-ad92-a0d12df53db9@att.net> <vkp0fv$b7ki$2@dont-email.me>
 <b125beff-cb76-4e5a-b8b8-e4c57ff468e9@att.net> <vkr8j0$t59a$1@dont-email.me>
 <98519289-0542-40ce-886e-b50b401ef8cf@att.net> <vksicn$16oaq$7@dont-email.me>
 <8e95dfce-05e7-4d31-b8f0-43bede36dc9b@att.net> <vl1ckt$2b4hr$1@dont-email.me>
 <53d93728-3442-4198-be92-5c9abe8a0a72@att.net> <vl5tds$39tut$1@dont-email.me>
 <9c18a839-9ab4-4778-84f2-481c77444254@att.net> <vl87n4$3qnct$1@dont-email.me>
 <6db7afa9-f1e1-4d2b-beba-a5fc7a8b8686@att.net> <vl952v$3vk28$1@dont-email.me>
 <e97ca358-cc9c-4f6f-a93b-3459821fc4aa@att.net> <vl9ev9$1u2d$1@dont-email.me>
 <53806d5c-f456-4c13-8506-24c0b9ab310e@att.net> <vlas93$cr0l$1@dont-email.me>
 <931a709f-7dc7-46ed-a1a2-d0e1b60fc542@att.net> <vldp55$vlah$5@dont-email.me>
 <0c4df4ba-a731-46ce-b2ef-80a497cf58eb@att.net> <vlh45n$1mcph$3@dont-email.me>
 <vlh73o$1oaah$1@dont-email.me> <vlhbn2$1p52c$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlhj98$1qnj9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2025 10:00:04 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ae605ac3e7bf74a89532ac4e88c94750";
	logging-data="2240672"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18pF4rN1dyElpwudSsbKa43QVmjdPzrUFs="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ljYASp9GLvE+lvRuKE7RY8RbDJY=
In-Reply-To: <vlhj98$1qnj9$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3093

On 06.01.2025 22:51, FromTheRafters wrote:
> WM presented the following explanation :
>> On 06.01.2025 19:23, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>> WM pretended :
>>>
>>>> 0 is a cardinal but not an ordinal.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>> Who is the zeroest clown?
> 
> Okay, maybe not with "your" definition of the ordinal numbers.

Ordinal numbers may be written in English with numerals and letter 
suffixes: 1st, 2nd or 2d, 3rd or 3d, 4th, 11th, 21st, 101st, 477th, etc 
[Wikipedia]

> This is 
> mathematics,

No, that is matheology, a ferquently disproven theory, nowadays only 
supported by stultified persons.

The clearest contradiction is this:
Every union of FISONs {1, 2, 3, ..., n} which stay below a certain 
threshold stays below that threshold. Every FISON stays below 1 % of ℕ 
because when extended by 100 {1, 2, 3, ..., 100n} is less than ℕ.

The FISONs form a potentially infinite collection whereas ℕ is an 
invariable set with |ℕ| is a fixed transfinite number larger than every 
finite number |{1, 2, 3, ..., n}| = n.

Regards, WM