Re: induction vs Cantor

From: Poker Joker (Poker_at_wi.rr.com)
Date: 11/26/04 

Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:30:25 -0600

"Mike Saburov" <misha.saburov@dcbars.ru> wrote in message
news:co7kpf$9f4$1@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
>
> "Poker Joker" <Poker@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:8vHpd.1507$XQ2.823@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>> Let L_1 be a list of reals that implies a mapping F_1
>> between the naturals and reals.
>>
> This is only possible if R is countable. Have you already proved that?

I'm not trying to prove that. I'm pointing out why so many people object
to Cantor's diagonal proof. If I've proven that, I'm sorry. I didn't mean
to.

> In other words, you prove that R is countable based on assumption that R
> is
> countable.

I think I'm pointing out Cantor proves that R is uncountable by
showing that you can generate countably many numbers in R.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... "Mike Saburov" wrote in message ... >> between the naturals and reals. ... I think I'm pointing out Cantor proves that R is uncountable by ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... In sci.logic, Mike Saburov ... >> between the naturals and reals. ... It's still legal to go .sigless. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... In sci.logic, Mike Saburov ... >> between the naturals and reals. ... It's still legal to go .sigless. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Calculus XOR Probability
    ... infinity, which is the length of the real line in unit intervals. ... number of reals within each unit interval, which may sound contrary, given the ... And that won't prevent me from pointing out that no inconsistency has been ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... > Daryl McCullough said: ... >> naturals) ... >> contradiction. ... The difficulty with pointing out to TO that his presumptins lead to ...
    (sci.math)