On 2010-06-28, Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> wrote: > So, here is an informal presentation of Cantor's diagonal argument > that avoids the word "list" (as well as a few other common verbal > shortcuts): > > 1. Let S be the set {0, 1}^N. > 2. For any function L from N to S, we can identify an element of S not > in the image of L.
Peter is incapable of separating the usual informal phrase "we can..." from his fixed idea of "there exists a finite algorithm that can...".
So, for example:
2. For any function L from N to S, there exists an element of S not in the image of L.
No mention of "we can identify it" or even "given L we can find it". Those are irrelevant distractions that he will be unable to see past to the actual matter of the proof.
