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

On 1/9/2025 3:23 PM, WM wrote:

On 09.01.2025 20:46, Jim Burns wrote:

Do you (WM) disagree with
'finite' meaning
'smaller.than fuller.by.one sets'?

>
That is also true for infinite sets.

Apparently it's true for your infiniteᵂᴹ sets.
However,
it's false for our infiniteⁿᵒᵗᐧᵂᴹ sets.
Whatever claim you (WM) make about infinite sets
is not a claim about _our_ infiniteⁿᵒᵗᐧᵂᴹ sets.
It is as though I claimed that 2+2≠4 but
in my proof, I count 1,2,4,5,6...
It's not.even.wrong.
Communication has not occurred.