Re: Simple enough for every reader?

On 04.07.2025 14:49, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 04 Jul 2025 14:23:57 +0200 schrieb WM:

On 04.07.2025 13:18, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 04 Jul 2025 12:15:16 +0200 schrieb WM:

On 04.07.2025 10:38, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 03 Jul 2025 21:10:39 +0200 schrieb WM:

On 03.07.2025 16:12, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 03 Jul 2025 15:08:25 +0200 schrieb WM:

>

The rule of subset proves that every proper subset has fewer
elements

No such rule for infinite sets.

For all sets.

No, this is not an accepted theorem of mainstream mathematics.

But it is correct. See the last paragraph. Can you contradict it?

It is incorrect: infinite sets have subsets of the same cardinality.

But cardinality is nonsense because mathematics contradicts it.

Cardinality IS mathematics.

Nevertheless it contradicts mathematics, according to which in every interval (0, 2n] and in the limit there are twice as many natural numbers as even numbers. Every correct counting method must confirm this result.

All primes can be known and there is no contradiction.

If all become known, then a last one becomes known.

 

You: Primes are not infinite themselves.
Me: But the known primes are a potentially infinite collection.

Yeah, that we know only finitely many primes has nothing to do with that.

It is impossible to know all. They can only get known one by one. To know all implies a last one.
Regards, WM