Virgil
Posts:
4,479
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Simple NON-Refutation of Cantor's Proof
Posted:
Dec 26, 2012 1:20 AM
|
|
In article
<f4460baa-6cbf-4a42-8285-dbcb6dcf2f73@l3g2000pbq.googlegroups.com>,
Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 26, 1:23 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <aa637598-f327-464f-954b-9cdbe4c87...@i2g2000pbi.googlegroups.com>,
> > Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Since the constructed string must differ from each string listed in L in
> > > > a way that gives it a different value from that listed string, how can
> > > > it possibly still be among a set of values from which it is by
> > > > construction excluded?
> >
> > > the size of the string is not fixed.
> >
> > The one to be constructed is constructed to be of the same length as
> > the ones listed.
> >
> >
> >
> > > You construct a portion, you construct another portion, and you never
> > > stop.
> >
> > One usually creates a rule which defines all the digits of the
> > construction simultaneously.
> >
>
> Right but your rule is just applied to one digit at a time
Not when it is being applied to all infinitely many strings
simultaneously.
--
|
|
