Re: Cantor's "diagonal argument". My Objection.

In article <ghck07$rjq$1@xxxxxxxx>, John Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Arturo Magidin wrote:
In article <gh9mat$l8h$2@xxxxxxxx>, John Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Arturo Magidin wrote:

No, I did not. I said "an ordering among the naturals".
Yes, a placement for digits.

You know, just repeating the same lie (or the same idiocy) does not
suddenly make it true. Your crap does not become gold simply because
you insist on trying to polish it.



Look, slow down when you read.

I slow down as much as I need to when I read. I read for
comprehension. Whereas you only read for plagiarism.

"An ordering among the naturals" means 1) there are properties of order,
and 2) there are properties of naturals.

No. An ordering among the naturals means a binary relation on the set
of naturals which is reflexive, antisymmetric, and
transitive. "Properties of the naturals" do not come into play into
the notion of "an order among the naturals."

But of course, knowing this requires that you KNOW WHAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT. And as you've made abundantly clear, you happen to
believe that knowledge is an obstacle that must be circumvented before
you open your mouth.

And, that these properties of
order allow the natural's to fall into their correct place.

Nonsense.

In other words, you have described a placement, or ordering, that places
the naturals in their correct position.

I did not describe anything, Sillypants. You are again projecting your
inability to understand onto others.

So, let's keep this straight: YOU are the idiot who cannot keep his
lies and his ignorance straight. I'm the guy who knows what he is
saying.

Clear now, Mufrius?

--
======================================================================
"Certo scio, occisam saepe sapere plus multo suem."
-- Plautus, Miles Gloriosus
======================================================================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... Yes, a placement for digits. ... just repeating the same lie does not ... An ordering among the naturals means a binary relation ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... just repeating the same lie does not ... An ordering among the naturals means a binary relation ... the naturals in their correct position. ... lies and his ignorance straight. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... you are using size as a criterion of ordering. ... I ignore your idea that a correct position can be defined without a number ("an ordering among ALL the naturals, that allows you to say which natural goes in which position"). ... From there, we go all the way up, then turn around and do the odd numbers back down to 43. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Cantors "diagonal argument". My Objection.
    ... the Platypus) wrote: ... you are using size as a criterion of ordering. ... I ignore your idea that a correct position can be defined without a number ("an ordering among ALL the naturals, ...
    (sci.logic)