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: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:03:32 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <vrlud4$3hfcp$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vqrbtd$1chb7$2@solani.org> <vrf5bp$1gcun$1@dont-email.me>
 <b3730bf7-bcd1-4698-b465-6d6ef190b29d@att.net> <vrgm1k$2s8c6$2@dont-email.me>
 <c81100d7-9354-4c8e-b216-e147cab9b41c@att.net> <vrhrlb$3ta8t$1@dont-email.me>
 <c0de7504-7d17-42f1-83e8-8767c0859c0c@att.net> <vrj5nh$12273$1@dont-email.me>
 <efbe60c5-6691-4fd6-8638-589fd95ec8a4@att.net> <vrkabi$233at$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrkca8$18dh$1@news.muc.de> <vrkf5b$279ci$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrkfnj$279ci$2@dont-email.me> <vrklg9$124q$1@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:03:33 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d42801696bdd1b1adfab498870700b12";
	logging-data="3718553"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/N/VRPTMOCWZAC99Fht/4MbGH/QYMucX0="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wwtwfqOgOmBiOY8rHw7UBk0oFgE=
In-Reply-To: <vrklg9$124q$1@news.muc.de>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2333

On 21.03.2025 22:25, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> 
> What was the context of this quote?  Was it a letter to a fellow
> mathematician, or a in a published work, or what?

A published work: Mitteilungen zur Lehre vom Transfiniten. Collected 
Works 378-439.

> It seems Cantor was fumbling around, trying to get a handle on some
> concept, and called it Realität for want of a better word.  With the
> benefit of over a century of development, we can see there is no need for
> this concept, which might not even be consistent.

Uneducated cranks may think so. Reality however is the fact that proper 
subsets have fewer elements than their sets.
> 
> OK, Cantor said/wrote this.  It is still rubbish from a modern point of
> view.

The modern point of view is supported by fools only, mainly by 
uneducated poor thinkers.

Regards, WM