Re: Why you can not count real number?

"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
phadamasci wrote:
Mike Deeth wrote:

This is no problem, it is well known that the reals can be paired up
with the integers in a natural way, and this is what it actually means
for a set to be countable.

I'm surprised to hear that pairing up the reals with the integer in a
natural way is possible.

That's because Mike Deeth aka Nathan the Great who has
ranged from 11 to 13 years old for at least a decade, is one of
the sci.math cranks who thinks the reals are countable.

It isn't "well known" because it isn't true.

Isn't he a troll, rather than a crank? I don't think he believes
the bollocks he posted any more than you or I do.

I bet he's tallying as we speak...

Phil
--
The man who is always worrying about whether or not his soul would be
damned generally has a soul that isn't worth a damn.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-1894), American physician and writer
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: If WM,JJ,LV, PO, and RF all left,
    ... cranks all left, would we have ... George, please, not all who wander are lost. ... While that may be so, I do argue that there is a particular function that bijects the naturals and the unit interval of reals, and that it preserves ordering, in obviously a non-standard construction of real numbers. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: .9 repeating repeated - generalization
    ... In either case there must be a number that lies between ... some "cranks" prefer the existence ... reals, where no nonzero infinitesimals exist, the reals ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: how to list all of the real numbers
    ... Some of the reals ... I have the impression that Calvin is earnestly learning about ... uncountablity and such, and he is sharing his ways of thinking about the ... The topic of uncountability is so often brought up by cranks that it is ...
    (sci.math)