On Saturday, November 3, 2012 4:35:47 AM UTC+2, Peter Webb wrote: > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> > > > I can't produce a list of all computable numbers, but that doesn't mean > > they are uncountable. Cantor showed that the Reals are not recursively > > enumerable, not that they are uncountable. >
*** Mingling: Peter, I think you're deeply wrong. Cantor DID prove the reals can't be put in 1-1 and onto correspondence with the naturals, i.e. any list of reals will miss at least one of them.
I don't think the above has anything to do with r.e. or whatever but SIMPLY with real numbers.
After this, no wonder cranks rejoice...stupidly, as they believe that if someone makes a mistake then the whole theory falls down, but still: they rejoice.