On 23/06/2010 8:34 PM, WM wrote: > On 23 Jun., 04:18, Sylvia Else<syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote: >> On 23/06/2010 11:33 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 23/06/2010 11:03 AM, Virgil wrote: >>>> In article >>>> <2000e81b-7c5a-41be-b6af-98f96f2fb...@w31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, >>>> WM<mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: >> >>>>> On 22 Jun., 21:34, Virgil<Vir...@home.esc> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> But (A0, A1, A2, ...) is obviously countable. Above you say it's >>>>>>>> "certainly >>>>>>>> not countable", but it is. >> >>>>>>> The set is certainly countable. But it cannot be written as a list >> >>>>>> But it HAS been written as a list (A0, A1, A2, ...), >> >>>>> Does this list contain the anti-diagonal of (..., An, ... A2, A1, A0, >>>>> L0)? >> >>>> Since (..., An, ... A2, A1, A0, L0) does not appear to be a list, why >>>> should there be any antidiagonal for it? >> >>> Ach! Let's scrap A0 - it's confusing. >> >>> If we let L_n be the nth element in the list L0, and An the >>> anti-diagonal of the An-1, An-2,...., A1, L_1, L_2, L_3,... >> >>> then >> >>> L_1 >>> A1 >>> L_2 >>> A2 >>> L_3 >>> A3 >>> L_4 >>> ... >> >>> is a list. I'm still thinking about that. >> >>> Sylvia. >> >> Hmm... >> >> A1 is the antidiagonal of L1 L2 L3... >> >> A2 is the antidiagonal of L1 A1 L2 L3... >> >> A3 is the antidiagonal of L1 A1 L2 A2 L3 L4... >> >> Each An is thus constructed from a list that is different from the list >> into which it is inserted. So the construction does not lead to a list >> that should contain its own anti-diagonal, and it doesn't. > > Ln = > > An > ... > A2 > A1 > A0 > L0 > > Does your bijection contain the anti-diagonal of > (..., An, ... A2, A1, A0, L0)?
I don't understand why you've recast it back to that form. You can't even form the anti-diagonal of that - what would the first digit of the antidiagonal be?
