Virgil
Posts:
4,482
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: The Diagonal Argument
Posted:
Dec 26, 2012 4:23 AM
|
|
In article
<28f4d232-f834-44c6-8fc7-6e9d743a0a1f@t5g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
George Greene <greeneg@email.unc.edu> wrote:
> On Dec 26, 12:28 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > it fails because with Infinite Sets of Reals
> > You can alter the Number Order
> > To change the digit back!
>
> THAT DOESN'T CHANGE anything!
> You can permute the list of reals ANY WAY YOU LIKE.
> That will give you A DIFFERENT anti-diagonal and thus a DIFFERENT new
> number
> but NEITHER THE NEW ANTI-DIAGONAL NOR THE OLD ONE will be on EITHER
> list!
> Obviously permuting the list does NOT change the answer to ANY
> question of the
> form "is x on this list?". It might change WHERE it is, if it's on
> there,
> but it does NOT change the answer to "yes it is" or "no it isn't".
>
>
> > Its like putting a coin on a 2UP paddle
> > and giving it a one way opposing flip.
> >
> > Null Operation as you just flip it twice!
>
> That's just ONE DIGIT, DUMBASS. THE ISSUE is about THE WHOLE
> new anti-diagonal. Changing the list does NOT change ANY digits of
> the OLD
> ORIGINAL anti-diagonal. It gives you a NEW list with a NEW anti-
> diagonal.
> Which is ALSO NOT ON the list.
> The issue in any case IS NOT EVEN WHETHER "the argument fails".
> The issue is whether the anti-diagonal IS OR IS NOT ON the list.
> And it is OBVIOUSLY NOT ON IT since it differs from EVERY real on the
> list.
You are being too rational and sensible to convince any of the kooks.
--
|
|
