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

Am 03.01.2025 um 22:45 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

On 1/3/2025 6:50 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 1/3/25 3:52 AM, WM wrote:

On 03.01.2025 02:52, Moebius wrote:
>

Nope. For each and every FISON F: F c_proper IN.
>
But UNION(Set_of_FISONs) = IN.

>
Every union of FISONs including them all which stay below a certain threshold stays below that threshold. >
Regards, WM

I just mentioned a counterexample to your claim, you stupid idiot!
Hint:
| For each and every FISON F: F c_proper IN. But UNION(Set_of_FISONs) = IN.
So the union of (the set of) _all_ FISONs does NOT "stay below" IN, though each and every FISON does.
<facepalm>

Which is different from *ALL* of them, which your logic can't do, and thus shows you are just a stupid idiot that just doesn't understand the infinite.

 Yet he teaches? wow.

Maybe the patients in a psychiatric ward.
.
.
.