Sujet : Re: Contradiction of bijections as a measure for infinite sets
De : FTR (at) *nospam* nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 03. Apr 2024, 16:59:54
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Peripheral Visions
Message-ID : <uujudu$115r$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb
WM presented the following explanation :
Le 02/04/2024 à 17:51, Jim Burns a écrit :
On 4/2/2024 3:36 AM, WM wrote:
>
If your assumption leads to "no bijection",
but there is a bijection,
then your assumption is wrong.
>
My trick proves that there is no bijection.
Or could you explain why first bijecting n and n/1 should destroy an existing bijection?
Your 'trick' only fails to demonstrate a bijection. Failing to demonstrate a bijection does not mean that there is no bijection, only that your 'trick' doesn't work to that end.
…