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

On 11/16/2024 09:59 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/16/2024 09:56 PM, Jim Burns wrote:

On 11/17/2024 12:30 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/16/2024 08:57 PM, Jim Burns wrote:

On 11/16/2024 11:35 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/16/2024 08:18 PM, Jim Burns wrote:

On 11/16/2024 7:17 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/16/2024 02:46 PM, Jim Burns wrote:

On 11/16/2024 5:31 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 11/16/2024 12:29 PM, Jim Burns wrote:

On 11/16/2024 12:07 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

>

you have ignored Russell his paradox and so on

>
No.
>
Selecting axioms which do not suffer from claiming
  that the set of all non.self.membered sets
  is self.membered or claiming it isn't
is not ignoring Russel,
it is responding to Russell.
>
Russell points out that
_we do not want_ to claim
that the set of all non.self.membered sets
  is self.membered or claiming it isn't.
>
We respond: Okay, we'll stop doing that.

>

Bzzt, flake-out.
It's not pretty the act of making lies.

>

Quote what I wrote which you think is a lie.

>
"We respond"

>
⎛ The modern study of set theory was initiated by
⎜ Georg Cantor and Richard Dedekind in the 1870s.
⎜ However,
⎜ the discovery of paradoxes in naive set theory,
⎜ such as Russell's paradox,
⎜ led to the desire for
⎜ a more rigorous form of set theory
⎝ that was free of these paradoxes.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermelo%E2%80%93Fraenkel_set_theory
>
Got anything else?
>
>

>
How about Finsler and Boffa?
>
>

Of course I say "Russell's retro-thesis" is a lie itself.
That is to say, when, there aren't yet infinite collections gesammelt,
that's of those the whole set of those that don't contain themselves,
that naturally the infinite inductive set by expansion of comprehension
does contain itself, as plainly a fact that there are no standard
models of integers instead only extensions or fragments, thusly,
saying that it's both complete and ordinary, is a lie, it's
a falsehood, and right after saying the other way: it's a slap
in the face.