Sujet : Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary, effectively)
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 03. Jan 2025, 18:20:12
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <a3e5c2fa50713996265a81fd7788f3419ffbb78e@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
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Fri, 03 Jan 2025 18:04:16 +0100 schrieb WM:
On 03.01.2025 13:26, joes wrote:
Am Fri, 03 Jan 2025 09:55:34 +0100 schrieb WM:
WHich is a property of the set, but not the individual members.
A property of its members.
Fuck no. The size of {1, 2, 4} is not a member.
There are three elements. That is the property of the elements.
No, the elements are numbers, none of which has size 3.
-- 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.