Path: 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: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 13:52:38 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <vm0dun$157q1$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> <417ff6da-86ee-4b3a-b07a-9c6a8eb31368@att.net>
 <vllfof$2n0uj$2@dont-email.me> <07258ab9-eee1-4aae-902a-ba39247d5942@att.net>
 <vlmst2$2vjr0$3@dont-email.me>
 <1ebbc233d6bab7878b69cae3eda48c7bbfd07f88@i2pn2.org>
 <vlo5f4$39hil$2@dont-email.me>
 <4c89380adaad983f24d5d6a75842aaabbd1adced@i2pn2.org>
 <vloule$3eqsr$1@dont-email.me>
 <ffffed23878945243684de7f2aa9aaaf29564508@i2pn2.org>
 <vlrej9$2m5k$1@dont-email.me> <d6ed4797-65e8-4004-853c-f07a37af0c11@att.net>
 <vls4j6$7v2k$3@dont-email.me>
 <49768a11b9a61e2d633d64ac17065a90c714774a@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 13:52:39 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="12b77b53e2dfb1366c2321c2e7d191b6";
	logging-data="1220417"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UwZiFiZQWWtUFHCKhGExFfuX6NUVLNeM="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Pn3s5Kz6oqms9LNuRF0Wp76+H7w=
In-Reply-To: <49768a11b9a61e2d633d64ac17065a90c714774a@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US

On 11.01.2025 15:15, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 1/10/25 4:48 PM, WM wrote:

>> You are inconsistent. You claim that all natural numbers are an 
>> invariable set. But when all elements are doubled then your set grows, 
>> showing it is not inc´variable. That is nonsense.

> No, the set DOESN'T grow,

The number of elements does not change. The odd numbers disappear.

Regards, WM