Re: More complex numbers than reals?

After serious thinking Moebius wrote :

Am 11.07.2024 um 12:34 schrieb FromTheRafters:

Ben Bacarisse was thinking very hard :

Moebius <invalid@example.invalid> writes:
>

Am 11.07.2024 um 02:28 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

On 7/10/2024 5:24 PM, Moebius wrote:

Am 11.07.2024 um 02:16 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>

{a, b, c} vs { 3, 4, 5 }
>
Both have the same number of elements, [...]

>
HOW do you know that? Please define (for any sets A, B):
>
     A and B /have the same number of elements/ iff ___________________ .
>
(i.e. fill out the blanks). :-)
>
Hint: That's what Ben Bacarisse is asking for.
>
Sure, it's "obvious" for us. But how would you define "have the same
number of elements" (in mathematical terms) such that it can be DEDUCED
(!) für certain sets A and B?
>
________________________________________
>
Ok, I'm slighty vicious now... :-)
>
If a = b = c, {a, b, c} still has "the same number of elements" as {3,
4, 5 }? :-P

>

I see {a, b, c} and {3, 4, 5} and think three elements.

>
Even if a = b = c?
>
C'mon man! :-P

>
Please, that's a red herring, and you know it!  No where did I say that
a, b and c stood for anything (i.e. that they might be variables in the
maths sense).  I this sort of context they are just distinct symbols.

>
Indeed!

>
Nonsense. (See below.)

 You have stated this nonsense before, I simply disagree with a set in roster form having duplicates.