Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: sci.logic Subject: Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 11:46:28 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: <539edbdf516d69a3f1207687b802be7a86bd3b48@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 10:46:29 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b60e6808d9f8cf14d50f70d1229b6b25"; logging-data="1140777"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19t+vvJnCZODkXMGv6wVRkq" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:GTQysv87ECfD5T1jIJoNicArGkk= Bytes: 1921 On 2024-12-15 19:29:23 +0000, WM said: > On 15.12.2024 13:52, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 12/15/24 6:05 AM, WM wrote: > >>> You believe that only afterwards the first interval comes into being? >>> That is not the infinity used in set theory. > >> There is no "next", only before or after in dense sets. >> >> Next is a property of directly indexed sets > > Next is a geometric property, in particular since the average distance > of intervals is infinitely larger than their sizes. No, it is not geometric. In geometry you can have a point in a plane or space but not a next point. -- Mikko