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

On 30.12.2024 17:11, Richard Damon wrote:

On 12/30/24 3:50 AM, WM wrote:

On 30.12.2024 01:39, Richard Damon wrote:

On 12/29/24 12:53 PM, WM wrote:

On 29.12.2024 13:34, Richard Damon wrote:

On 12/29/24 6:01 AM, WM wrote:

>

>
All definable numbers (FISONs) stay below 1 %. Every union of "below 1 %" stays below 1 %.

>
Since 0 is Less than 1, you are sort of correct, but that fact doesn't prove your claim.
>
The problem is that when you get to *ALL*

>
I get to all FISONs below a certain threshold, namely a threshold between which and ω there exist ℵ₀ natnumbers.
>

Which isn't "All FISONs"

>
Do you personally know FISONs larger than those? Please let me know them.

Sure, if your threshold is n,

My threshold is not a fixed number but a potentially infinite set which never grows to more than 1 % of ℕ. Proof: Every FISON that is multiplied by 100 remains a FISON that can be multiplied by 100 without changing this property.
Regards, WM