Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Moebius <invalid@example.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers
 (extra-ordinary)
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 04:41:09 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <vlsp8m$f6pk$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me> <vl87n4$3qnct$1@dont-email.me>
 <8ef20494f573dc131234363177017bf9d6b647ee@i2pn2.org>
 <vl95ks$3vk27$2@dont-email.me> <vl9ldf$3796$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlaskd$cr0l$2@dont-email.me> <vlc68u$k8so$1@dont-email.me>
 <vldpj7$vlah$7@dont-email.me>
 <a8b010b748782966268688a38b58fe1a9b4cc087@i2pn2.org>
 <vlei6e$14nve$1@dont-email.me> <66868399-5c4b-4816-9a0c-369aaa824553@att.net>
 <vlir7p$24c51$1@dont-email.me> <412770ca-7386-403f-b7c2-61f671d8a667@att.net>
 <vllg47$2n0uj$3@dont-email.me> <vllm44$2oeeq$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlm2fv$2qk9u$2@dont-email.me> <59af1502-0bc9-4266-b556-6164edb6a8d4@att.net>
 <vlmscv$2vgqf$1@dont-email.me>
 <9a22a29bfd5af29db5bad5f3cae537665b8dafd7@i2pn2.org>
 <vlochd$3akpm$2@dont-email.me>
 <a0aff8d9ca313d39093282bca3d2d2505092e153@i2pn2.org>
 <vlouqv$3eqsr$2@dont-email.me>
 <3918860dac06c85fd300953fa7ba2cd35c084460@i2pn2.org>
 <vlph0m$3i1ro$3@dont-email.me>
 <02e95cccef7a3cd03bbc32806ed278d4f05a6e26@i2pn2.org>
 <vls666$8h29$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: invalid@example.invalid
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 04:41:10 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="afb9fcf797f54f3138f574402a8e81c0";
	logging-data="498484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18xOU/PLjyLI6jD85jXTiRC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NcQH+krv02niRzwAE0vb0Pnu3P8=
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <vls666$8h29$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2929

Am 10.01.2025 um 23:15 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
> On 1/10/2025 4:41 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 1/9/25 5:01 PM, WM wrote:
>>> On 09.01.2025 21:24, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:51:43 +0100 schrieb WM:
>>>
>>>> all ordinals have an order, but omega still has no predecessor
>>>
>>> You <bla bla bla>

Was verstehst Du an der Aussage "omega has no predecessor" nicht, Du 
psychotischer Spinner?

>> It has no predecessor, just like 0 has no predecessor [...]
> 
> 0 has no predecessor in the unsigned integers.
> 
> Well, we can go into the signed integers where a predecessor of 0 is 0 - 
> 1 ?

Yes, but -1 is no ordinal number.

0 is the smallest _finite_ ordinal number and omega is the smallest 
_infinite_ ordinal number.

Note: the unsigned integers (i.e. the natural numbers) == the finite 
ordinal numbers.

..
..
..