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

On 1/8/25 9:31 AM, WM wrote:

On 08.01.2025 14:31, Jim Burns wrote:
 

⦃k: k < ω ≤ k+1⦄ = ⦃⦄
ω-1 does not exist.
>

Let us accept this result.
 Then the sequence of endsegments loses every natnumber but not a last one. Then the empty intersection of infinite but inclusion monotonic endsegments is violating basic logic. (Losing all numbers but keeping infinitely many can only be possible if new numbers are acquired.) Then the only possible way to satisfy logic is the non-existence of ω and of endsegments as complete sets.
 It is useless to prove your claim as long as you cannot solve this problem.
 Regards, WM

There isn't a "last one" to lose, so your arguement is based on your delusions.
YOUR "logic" violates the basic rules of logic, as you have admitted (but you don't understand your admission, because you don't understand what you words actual mean).
Sorry, all you are doing is proving your utter ignorance.