Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Hatto von Aquitanien <abbot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:12:23 -0400
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
Hatto von Aquitanien wrote:
The definition of N uses recursive enumeration. Any bijection to N is
recursively enumerable.
Well, no.
How can that *possibly* be true? N is recursively enumerable. The
definition of recursive enumerability might as well be - and in some
instances is given as - a bijection to N.
--
Nil conscire sibi
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Dave L. Renfro
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- References:
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Hatto von Aquitanien
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Dave Seaman
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Hatto von Aquitanien
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Hatto von Aquitanien
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Dave Seaman
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Hatto von Aquitanien
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
- Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- Prev by Date: Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- Next by Date: Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- Previous by thread: Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- Next by thread: Re: Attempts to Refute Cantor's Uncountability Proof?
- Index(es):