Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.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: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 15:36:31 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <vk1b1f$2srss$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vg7cp8$9jka$1@dont-email.me> <vjf7kl$2s7e5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vjfmq3$2upa9$3@dont-email.me>
 <c6b624cb0b1b55d54aab969ee5b4e283ec7be3cd@i2pn2.org>
 <vjhp8b$3gjbv$1@dont-email.me>
 <dc9e7638be92c4d158f238f8c042c8559cd46521@i2pn2.org>
 <vjjg6p$3tvsg$1@dont-email.me>
 <c31edc62508876748c8cf69f93ab80c0a7fd84ac@i2pn2.org>
 <vjka3b$1tms$3@dont-email.me>
 <e11a34c507a23732d83e3d0fcde7b609cdaf3ade@i2pn2.org>
 <vjmse3$k2go$2@dont-email.me>
 <069069bf23698c157ddfd9b62b9b2f632b484c40@i2pn2.org>
 <vjooeq$11n0g$2@dont-email.me>
 <c611fdd5710ea4e05d421327898dfd48277b66d6@i2pn2.org>
 <vjpbo0$15bha$2@dont-email.me>
 <7aa4daa380966c031798568433c3a7e079cd29cf@i2pn2.org>
 <vjplmh$177tn$2@dont-email.me>
 <e08128aa5aa13493ccc0f9a4e0473fdc1515cb24@i2pn2.org>
 <vjreth$1lvej$1@dont-email.me>
 <0ea781d0d3fe1c2cb4e900898f655d12de85a403@i2pn2.org>
 <vjsrm0$1tqvv$1@dont-email.me>
 <4830fbe90350c8c4e942352043d8d4511d4c15a4@i2pn2.org>
 <vjv6hn$2dujf$3@dont-email.me>
 <82cca81d299305d12334df1fe98f7b34d8bf482e@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 15:36:32 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b073b4606e4aae76152a468e84e37494";
	logging-data="3043228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+WnQ9MWW0VJ0/UC5dAHDnC7oibnNPi6Qk="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bFQrZ77TfQeyvJy4EvM/xZT+kRg=
In-Reply-To: <82cca81d299305d12334df1fe98f7b34d8bf482e@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2697

On 18.12.2024 21:15, joes wrote:
> Am Wed, 18 Dec 2024 20:07:35 +0100 schrieb WM:
>> On 18.12.2024 10:35, joes wrote:
>>   > Am Tue, 17 Dec 2024 22:49:51 +0100 schrieb WM:
>>   >> On 17.12.2024 13:34, Richard Damon wrote:
>>   >>
>>   >>> Your logic that if it holds for all FISONs, it holds for N,
>>   >> Please explain what Cantor does to apply more than what I apply,
>>   >> namely all n ∈ ℕ.
>>   > He „applies“ the set of all N, as opposed to every single n.
>> Please quote the text from which you have obtained that wrong idea.
> Why is it wrong?
> 
It is wrong because there is no such text from Cantor.

Regards, WM