Sujet : Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 17. Dec 2024, 12:07:11
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <d6c1c5d247bf350bed3f938013c93ecdad4b7464@i2pn2.org>
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 25 26 27 28 29 30
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:28:52 +0100 schrieb WM:
On 16.12.2024 11:23, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-12-15 11:33:15 +0000, WM said:
We cannot name dark numbers as individuals.
We needn't. The axioms of natural numbers ensure that every natural
number has a successor,
The set, i.e. all numbers together, has no successor.
It is not even in a sequence. How does that matter?
If that is not possible then there are no natural numbers.
That is not possible for an actually infinite set. It is only possible
for numbers coming into being.
You misunderstood: Mikko was naming the axioms of the naturals.
-- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)