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

On 1/8/25 4:06 AM, WM wrote:

On 08.01.2025 00:30, Richard Damon wrote:
 

Except you don't use *EVERY* FISON, only those below some limit n that is below a faction of infinity.

 Show a FISON that expanded by a factor of 100 or more covers ℕ. Fail!
 Regards, WM
 

There isn't one, but doesn't need to be.
You are just showing you don't understand the meaning of the words you are using.
Sets have properties that can differ from their members.
The infinitude of the Natural Numbers doesn't come from having members that are infinite, but from having an infinite number of members.
Your "logic" just can't handle sets with an infinite number of members, and you are just too stupid to understand that, or even see that you don't understand it.
You are the poster child for Dunning-Kruger.
Your "logic" is just based on LIES. The fact you have been shown this and continue just means you are a LIAR.