"Zuhair" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > On Nov 14, 12:45 am, "LudovicoVan" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote: <snip>
>> You are simply missing the point there: we don't need N* to disprove >> Cantor, >> we need N* to go beyond it and the standard notion of countability. In >> fact, that there is a bijection between N* and N is a bogus argument too, >> as >> the matter is rather about different order types. > > Now I think I'm beginning to somewhat perhaps understand your > argument.
That's cool, maybe in another while you'll actually get what the argument was.