Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: THE FOUNDATION OF NUMBERS BY CANTOR!
Replies: 6   Last Post: Jun 2, 2012 4:33 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
INFINITY POWER

Posts: 117
Registered: 11/1/11
Re: THE FOUNDATION OF NUMBERS BY CANTOR!
Posted: Jun 2, 2012 4:33 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jun 3, 12:23 am, Daryl McCullough <stevendaryl3...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 30, 2012 11:38:05 PM UTC-4, Graham Cooper wrote:
> > THE FOUNDATION OF NUMBERS BY CANTOR!
>
> > AD[r]=/=LIST[r,r] -> AD[r]=/=LIST[r,r]
>
> > -> 2^aleph_0 > aleph_0
>
> > -> 2x2x2x2... > 1+1+1+1...
>
> > Incomplete..Inconsistent..Uncomputable..Uncountable..Unformalizable..
> > Unspecifiable..NotUniversal..NotVerifiable

>
> > Gee I W o n d e r why that is!!??
>
> > Herc
>
> Because you're confused. 2^aleph_0 is not 2x2x..., and
> aleph_0 is not 1+1+...


You deny every statement ever made here about X>oo once confronted.

Is Will Hughes confused then for stating

2X2X2.. = 2^aleph0
is the amount of binary strings?

Herc
--
http://freewebs.com/namesort/matheology/THE-HAMMER.jpg



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.