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

On 18.12.2024 10:35, joes wrote:
 > Am Tue, 17 Dec 2024 22:49:51 +0100 schrieb WM:
 >> On 17.12.2024 13:34, Richard Damon wrote:
 >>
 >>> Your logic that if it holds for all FISONs, it holds for N,
 >> Please explain what Cantor does to apply more than what I apply, namely
 >> all n ∈ ℕ.
 > He „applies“ the set of all N, as opposed to every single n.
 >
Please quote the text from which you have obtained that wrong idea.
Regards, WM