Sujet : Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : sci.logicDate : 26. Nov 2024, 14:07:28
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <c5a03e73203e6409f6b50c25b84a22d8df0d210b@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 11/26/24 6:07 AM, WM wrote:
On 26.11.2024 10:09, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-11-25 14:38:13 +0000, WM said:
The simple example contradicts a bijection between the two sets described above.
>
What does "contradicts a bijection" mean?
>
It shows that the mapping claimed to be a bijection is not a bijection.
Regards, WM
Where did you do that with the ACTUAL bijection, and not just your strawman "equivalent".
Which element of which infinite set did not participate in the bijection?