Sujet : Re: 2N=E
De : james.g.burns (at) *nospam* att.net (Jim Burns)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 26. Oct 2024, 00:18:20
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <a45b5e62-4b8c-4428-83ef-8b9bf62d6981@att.net>
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
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 10/25/2024 3:07 PM, WM wrote:
On 25.10.2024 20:30, Jim Burns wrote:
'Infinite' does not mean
what you (WM) want it to mean.
>
Your unfounded claims are irrelevant.
E pur si muove!
Not.looking at proofs doesn't disappear them.
Relevant are only provable mathematical facts:
Provable:
⟦0,n⟧ ⊂ ⟦0,ω⦆ ⇔ ⟦0,n+n⟧ ⊂ ⟦0,ω⦆
When the density is halved the covered interval is doubled.
Provable:
2× : ℕ → 𝔼 : one.to.one
𝔼 = 2×(ℕ) ⊂ ℕ
ω = lub.ℕ = lub.𝔼
Lossless exchanges do never lose the exchanged.
Provable:
|𝔼| = |ℕ\𝔼| = |ℕ|
'Infinite' does not mean
what you (WM) want it to mean.