Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.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: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 13:01:43 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 25 Message-ID: References: <0e67005f-120e-4b3b-a4d2-ec4bbc1c5662@att.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 12:01:43 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b4dcbcf5c86b7a5e9dc6c30ffc3c299d"; logging-data="656587"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Y1FKT5RigHPb1MpRswwB1" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:1QXUbvNUdoDM0tTgOYHCD8ZAbXg= Bytes: 1836 On 2024-11-21 10:50:32 +0000, WM said: > On 21.11.2024 10:21, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-11-04 10:47:39 +0000, WM said: >> > >>>>> That is wrong. The measure outside of the intervals is infinite. Hence >>>>> there exists a point outside. This point has two nearest intervals >>>> >>>> No, it hasn't. >>> >>> In geometry it has. >> >> Depends on the set of intervals. > > No. Every point in the complement is closer to the end of an interval > than to its contents of rationals. True but irrelevant because it may be even closer to the end of another interval. In particular with Cantor's set of intervals where there is no nearest interval. -- Mikko