Re: induction vs Cantor

From: Poker Joker (Poker_at_wi.rr.com)
Date: 11/27/04 

Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:22:05 -0600

"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom%23virgil-7A56A6.19553826112004@[63.218.45.211]...

> I presumed that one was considering all possible listings, not just a
> particular sequence of them.
>
> If one does not consider all possible listings, how can one possibly be
> sure that one has at least one anti-diagonal for each possible listing,
> and without that how can one possibly be sure that one has included all
> possible anti-diagonals?
>
> Thus the manifest uncountablility of the set of all listings makes you
> assertion of the countability of the set of all anti-diagonals highly
> suspect.

No comment. Uses Cantor's conclusions.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... "Virgil" wrote in message ... > particular sequence of them. ... > If one does not consider all possible listings, ... > assertion of the countability of the set of all anti-diagonals highly ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... If one does not consider all possible listings, ... Thus the manifest uncountablility of the set of all listings makes you ... assertion of the countability of the set of all anti-diagonals highly ... suspect. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: induction vs Cantor
    ... If one does not consider all possible listings, ... Thus the manifest uncountablility of the set of all listings makes you ... assertion of the countability of the set of all anti-diagonals highly ... suspect. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: post installation problems
    ... > The sequence of starting things is controlled by the listings in the ... the XX in the names above indicates the sequence they start. ... > Delaying the start of the network will easily fix this for you. ... Or should I simply delay it in all? ...
    (Fedora)
Quantcast