Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?

From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (spamtrap_at_library.lspace.org.invalid)
Date: 11/22/04 

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:34:56 -0500

In <20041120130827.876$gq@newsreader.com>, on 11/20/2004
   at 06:08 PM, curt@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) said:

>I was confused at the start of this thread
>about how some important things are formally defined in mathematics.

You still are.

>But about what I'm talking now, there is no confusion.

If there were no confusion then you wouldn't be writing about
algorithms and procedures in a context where they don't exist.

>Everything you read some of my words and it doesn't make sense,
>it's because you don't understand my message.

No, it's because the message is senseless. Your insistence that even
though you don't understand the fundamentals you are still correct
outs you firmly with the circle squarers and angle trisectors.

>Your functions are algorithms

No. That delusion is at the heart of your inability to communicate.

>So, you have an algorithm for constructing the anti-diagonal which
>says it's not in any row, but yet my mapping function is the same
>algorithm, and it's able to guarantee that everything your function
>constructs _IS_ in the table in row N+1.

No. The "partial diagonal" has nothing to do with the Cantor diagonal
argument. His function doesn't "construct" anything, and the output of
his function isn't in the table.

>So how is it possible to conclude that the diagonal is
>not in the table, when every number is guaranteed to be in the table

How is it possible to send a message when the Moon is made of green
cheese? The answer is obvious; the question has an assumption contrary
to fact. It is not the case that every number is guaranties to be in
the table. 

-- 
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT  <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action.  I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.  Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me.  Do not
reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

Relevant Pages

  • Re: deques, deques, and dequeues
    ... rewrite this so that the upperbound time is guaranteed ... algorithms that yield worst-case (note this is the correct ... That way you can guarantee a bounded return time no ... to unacceptable system behavior, even if "amortized time" ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.development)
  • Re: double with precision
    ... approximates, troubles start cropping up. ... If you compute the same number with different algorithms, ... guarantee the results will be bang on. ...
    (comp.lang.java.help)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... >> guarantee you that most people who do not hold that axiom who are asked ... > about dictionary meanings, but about mathematics. ... who SAYS this is about mathematics? ... elements" does not always equate to "cardinality". ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... >> guarantee you that most people who do not hold that axiom who are asked ... > about dictionary meanings, but about mathematics. ... who SAYS this is about mathematics? ... elements" does not always equate to "cardinality". ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... >> guarantee you that most people who do not hold that axiom who are asked ... > about dictionary meanings, but about mathematics. ... who SAYS this is about mathematics? ... elements" does not always equate to "cardinality". ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast