Re: A New (And Slightly Stupid) Set Theory
- From: "HERC777" <herc777@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Apr 2005 22:11:56 -0700
I dont't read sci.math, repost without followups so I can reply.
Why on Earth do people use followups, people post to groups they choose
to post to.
99% of the time people end up posting to groups they did not intend to,
its like sending a self stamped envelope to someone but the address is
to Fagtown.
Take an infinite sequence of binary expansions.
01010101001.........
11110101010........
01001010011........
take any ordinary countable sized set (sequence)
{the, cat, is, sitting, on, my, lap}
Use the infinite sequence as a bit mask.
(arial font)
AND
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1.........
{the, cat, is, sitting, on, my, lap}
=> {cat, sitting, my}
AND
1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1010........
{the, cat, is, sitting, on, my, lap}
=> {the, cat, is, sitting, my}
AND
0 1 0 0 1 0 1 001........
{the, cat, is, sitting, on, my, lap}
=> {cat, on, lap}
Is there some sequence of binary expansions that will produce the
powerset?
Herc
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A New (And Slightly Stupid) Set Theory
- From: The Ghost In The Machine
- Re: A New (And Slightly Stupid) Set Theory
- Prev by Date: Integral
- Next by Date: Re: sequence of continuous functions
- Previous by thread: Re: A New (And Slightly Stupid) Set Theory
- Next by thread: Re: A New (And Slightly Stupid) Set Theory
- Index(es):