On Jun 14, 3:28 am, stevendaryl3...@yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote: > Ross A. Finlayson says... > > >Then I say this reasoning and the equivalency function work this way: > >when the list starts with each element of the list, their antidiagonal > >is 1, .111111..._2, that number is the end of the list, > > There is no end to the list, since there is no largest natural number. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY
That's among reasons why it was described that symmetries of the function are used to describe the elements of the list at the beginning and "end". That is done instead of augmenting the natural integers with a compactification with a point at infinity, which is an agreeable enough formalism in some cases, here unnecessary. (As well, it doesn't make use of arguments that N is implicitly compact.)
Funny there's not an end to the list but that's where it goes.
