In article <k6ki4c$18t$1@dont-email.me>, "INFINITY POWER" <infinity@limited.com> wrote:
> That is: the 'missing subset' of any' infinite set of subsets are the same, > depending on the enumeration not the data in the set. > > Herc
That statement hides a contrary-to-fact assumption. Which Herc is no doubt unable to see without help.
Given ANY listing of distinct subsets of N, there is no such thing as "THE" missing subset, there are uncountably many of them missing from any such listing.
There is, in fact, a totally mechanical and automatic way of demonstrating AT LEAST as many sets missing from any such list as appear listed in it. --
