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

On 12/5/24 3:54 AM, WM wrote:

On 04.12.2024 20:59, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>

Not sure why WM thinks that Cantor Pairing does not work with any natural number... I think I am not misunderstanding WM here.

>
Take any natnumber you can. Almost all natnumbers are following. Infinitely many of them cannot be "taken" or "given" and cannot be proven to be in any mapping. But Cantor claims that all without any exception can be taken.
>
Regards, WM

 Which ones can not be "taken" or "given".
 That is your flaw, you think that human capability defines the Natural Numbers, they are defined by mathematical logic, and just exist even if we can not possible write down one of them inside the physical universe.
 Your problem is you put your cart before the horse, and it just eats all your produce up.