Re: Two results of set geometry

On Sep 12, 6:41 am, Han de Bruijn <Han.deBru...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
WM wrote:
The set of natural numbers is not a natural number. The set N has
omega elements but it has no numerical seize.

The set of natural numbers, if it could exist, would be equivalent to
another natural number. Therefore it cannot exist. (Tip, hint: there
is a bijection between sets and naturals).



Note: this bijection exists in Bruijnland and perhaps
in Wolkensmuekenheim. It does not exist in Orlovia.


- William Hughes

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: infinity
    ... > Yes, for your proposed mapping between N and P, ... the largest element would not map to the ... so our bijection never runs into any such endpoint and ... what is the last element in the mapping of naturals to evens? ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... In the latter case, there is a bijection, ... >> regarding the evens, and ask how many bits each set's elements has, the evens ... like the bijection between the naturals and the ... > infinite sets, there is no way to use a "running out of" argument, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Uncountable sets in CZF?
    ... >bijection between N and R and thus P? ... numbers in a model V of ZFC, then there is a generic extension V ... first-order logic (or maybe additional axioms to the first-order logic, ... >naturals and the reals. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantors circular "proof" that evens = integers
    ... The fact that there was a bijection between the naturals ... The naturals WERE ALREADY THERE ... OUR set theory is 1st-order ZFC and WE KNOW what ... there are no infinite numbers in PA, ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: infinity
    ... >>> Are you aware that if I claim I have a bijection from a set ... >>> elements from set A and maps them to elements of set B? ... half does not map to anything in the naturals. ... > do that by REASONING about all of the elements at once. ...
    (sci.math)