Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s logic 
Sujet : Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)
De : wolfgang.mueckenheim (at) *nospam* tha.de (WM)
Groupes : sci.logic
Date : 27. Nov 2024, 21:09:57
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vi7uam$5cmb$1@dont-email.me>
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
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 27.11.2024 15:16, Richard Damon wrote:
On 11/27/24 5:57 AM, WM wrote:

You switch between a white hat being revealed from under the black hat when it is moved from 10n to n, and the hats being switched.
It is irrelevant, but assume the hats being switched. Black hats for numbers 10n, white hats for all others.

The second happens when you have TWO sets of numbers,
We have one set, namely ℕ to be covered with black hats. The natural numbers 10n are already covered. Now the black hats have to be moved to cover all natural numbers.
In no cases were white hats "deleted" because in both cases we still had an infinite set of numbers with white hats
But Cantor claims that all can be replaced by black hats.
We have the black hats from the second set {10, 20, 30, 40, …}. They shall cover all numbers The numbers divisible by 10 from the first set ℕ = {1, 2, 3, 4, …} have been covered at the outset.
 No, that isn't the bijection being talked about.
This bijection comes afterwards.
 You can't disprove a bijection by not following it.
You can follow it now. The number of black hats remains the same.
 You don't seem to understand Cantor's claim, it isn't that every possible attempt at a bijection will succeed, it is that *IF* there is one, the sets are equal.
Now show that there is one.
 
We then swap hats between 1st set 2 and 2nd set 20, and so on for the first
set n and the second set 10n, and we see that ALL the numbers in the first
set get their black hats and all the numbers in the second set get white
hats, and thus we have proven that this is a bijection, and the sets use
have the same cardinality.
>
You are just showing you don’t understand what is happening,
>
Do you understand that the bijection is not disturbed in the least when we first cover all numbers 10n of the first set ℕ with black hats. We can proceed then precisely in the same way as you say, can't we? What is different in your opinion?

Of course it is, since you can't complete the first part.
It is completed! Every number 10n starts wit a black hat.
Regards, WM

Date Sujet#  Auteur
3 Nov 24 * Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers332WM
3 Nov 24 +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers59Mikko
3 Nov 24 i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers58WM
13 Dec 24 i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers57Mikko
13 Dec 24 i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers56WM
14 Dec 24 i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers55Mikko
14 Dec 24 i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers54WM
14 Dec 24 i     +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers47joes
14 Dec 24 i     i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers46WM
14 Dec 24 i     i +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers6Richard Damon
14 Dec 24 i     i i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5WM
15 Dec 24 i     i i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4Mikko
15 Dec 24 i     i i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3WM
15 Dec 24 i     i i   +- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Richard Damon
16 Dec 24 i     i i   `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Mikko
15 Dec 24 i     i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers39Mikko
15 Dec 24 i     i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers38WM
15 Dec 24 i     i   +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers18Richard Damon
15 Dec 24 i     i   i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers17WM
15 Dec 24 i     i   i +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers15Richard Damon
16 Dec 24 i     i   i i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers14WM
16 Dec 24 i     i   i i +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers8Mikko
16 Dec 24 i     i   i i i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers7WM
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers6Mikko
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5WM
18 Dec 24 i     i   i i i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4Mikko
18 Dec 24 i     i   i i i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3WM
19 Dec 24 i     i   i i i     `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2Mikko
19 Dec 24 i     i   i i i      `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1WM
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5Richard Damon
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4WM
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3Richard Damon
17 Dec 24 i     i   i i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2WM
19 Dec 24 i     i   i i     `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Richard Damon
16 Dec 24 i     i   i `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Mikko
16 Dec 24 i     i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers19Mikko
16 Dec 24 i     i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers18WM
17 Dec 24 i     i     `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers17Mikko
17 Dec 24 i     i      `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers16WM
18 Dec 24 i     i       `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers15Mikko
18 Dec 24 i     i        `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers14WM
19 Dec 24 i     i         `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers13Mikko
19 Dec 24 i     i          `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers12WM
20 Dec 24 i     i           `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers11Richard Damon
20 Dec 24 i     i            `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers10WM
20 Dec 24 i     i             `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers9Richard Damon
21 Dec 24 i     i              `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers8WM
21 Dec 24 i     i               `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers7Richard Damon
21 Dec 24 i     i                `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers6WM
22 Dec 24 i     i                 `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5Richard Damon
22 Dec 24 i     i                  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4WM
22 Dec 24 i     i                   +- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Richard Damon
23 Dec 24 i     i                   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2Richard Damon
23 Dec 24 i     i                    `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1WM
15 Dec 24 i     `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers6Mikko
15 Dec 24 i      `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5WM
15 Dec 24 i       +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3Richard Damon
15 Dec 24 i       i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2WM
15 Dec 24 i       i `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Richard Damon
16 Dec 24 i       `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Mikko
3 Nov 24 +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers271Jim Burns
4 Nov 24 i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers270WM
4 Nov 24 i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers269Mikko
4 Nov 24 i  +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers234WM
4 Nov 24 i  i+* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers12Richard Damon
4 Nov 24 i  ii`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers11WM
5 Nov 24 i  ii `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers10Richard Damon
5 Nov 24 i  ii  +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers8WM
5 Nov 24 i  ii  i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers7Richard Damon
5 Nov 24 i  ii  i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers6WM
6 Nov 24 i  ii  i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers5Richard Damon
6 Nov 24 i  ii  i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4WM
7 Nov 24 i  ii  i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3Richard Damon
7 Nov 24 i  ii  i     `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2WM
7 Nov 24 i  ii  i      `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Richard Damon
5 Nov 24 i  ii  `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1WM
4 Nov 24 i  i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers221Mikko
4 Nov 24 i  i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers220WM
5 Nov 24 i  i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers219Mikko
5 Nov 24 i  i   +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers4WM
6 Nov 24 i  i   i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers3Mikko
6 Nov 24 i  i   i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers2WM
7 Nov 24 i  i   i  `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1Mikko
6 Nov 24 i  i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)214Ross Finlayson
6 Nov 24 i  i    +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)212WM
6 Nov 24 i  i    i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)211Mikko
6 Nov 24 i  i    i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)210WM
7 Nov 24 i  i    i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)209Mikko
7 Nov 24 i  i    i   +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)207WM
8 Nov 24 i  i    i   i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)206Mikko
8 Nov 24 i  i    i   i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)205WM
9 Nov 24 i  i    i   i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)204Mikko
9 Nov 24 i  i    i   i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)203WM
10 Nov 24 i  i    i   i    `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)202Mikko
10 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)199WM
11 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)198Mikko
11 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)196WM
12 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i i`* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)195Mikko
12 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i i `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)194WM
13 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i i  `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)193Mikko
13 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i i   `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)192WM
11 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     i `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)1WM
10 Nov 24 i  i    i   i     `* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)2WM
7 Nov 24 i  i    i   `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)1Ross Finlayson
6 Nov 24 i  i    `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)1Ross Finlayson
21 Nov 24 i  +* Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers33Mikko
4 Nov 24 i  `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers1WM
12 Dec 24 `- Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)1WM

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal