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

On 1/10/25 12:38 PM, WM wrote:

On 10.01.2025 13:41, Richard Damon wrote:

On 1/9/25 5:34 PM, WM wrote:

On 09.01.2025 22:15, joes wrote:

Am Thu, 09 Jan 2025 10:34:42 +0100 schrieb WM:

>

There is an infinite sequence of
infinite segments.

>
You cannot cut the set of natural numbers at any position to get two infinite sets. Infinite sequence means no content. Infinite content (content at all) means no infinite sequence.

 

Sure you can, you just need a special knife, like one that separates the odds from the evens.

 Here we talk about endsegments and the natural order.
 Regards, WM
 

And things that you just don't understand. The fact that you can take an infinite set and cut out a finite set (any finite set) and be left with an infinite set that is just a big as before seems to be something that has just blown your mind to smithereens due to the inconsistencies of your logic. You are just so ignorant, that you are ignorant of your ignorance.