Virgil
Posts:
4,479
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: The Diagonal Argument
Posted:
Dec 29, 2012 12:11 AM
|
|
In article
<ccbf7b1f-c94d-4ddf-b19e-d357a81c1b0a@ah9g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 29, 11:26 am, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <1cc84dc7-69a0-4280-83b5-dec4416d9...@p7g2000pbz.googlegroups.com>,
> > Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Dec 28, 7:18 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <4bf7b763-8100-46af-be9d-90187b0f8...@s10g2000pbg.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Then you agree
> >
> > > > > 0. T(1,2) T(2,1) T(3,3) T(4,4) T(5,5) T(6,6) ...
> >
> > > > > is potentially ON THE LIST L!
> >
> > > > But, if T(n,n) is as I previously defined it,
> > > > 0. T(1,1) T(2,2) T(3,3) T(4,4) T(5,5) T(6,6) ...
> > > > is not even potentially on it.
> >
> > > HERE IS L
> >
> > > L(x,y)
> > > +---------------->
> > > | 0. 2 3 4 5 6 7 ..
> > > | 0. 9 8 7 6 5 5 ..
> > > | 0. 1 2 3 1 2 3 ..
> > > | 0. 9 8 9 8 9 8 ..
> > > | 0. 6 5 6 5 6 5 ..
> > > | 0. 5 6 5 6 5 6 ..
> > > |
> > > v
> >
> > > HERE IS T
> >
> > > T(x,y)
> > > +---------------->
> > > | 0. 6 6 6 6 5 5 ..
> > > | 0. 5 5 5 5 6 6 ..
> > > | 0. 6 6 6 6 6 6 ..
> > > | 0. 5 5 5 5 5 5 ..
> > > | 0. 5 6 5 6 5 6 ..
> > > | 0. 6 5 6 5 6 5 ..
> > > |
> > > v
> >
> > That is not my "T".
> >
> > My "T(x,y)" gives a single row:
> >
> > 0. 6 5 6 5 5 5 ... ..
> >
>
>
> That's the D I A G O N A L of T !
>
> Talk about bad mathematicians!
>
> DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT T IS?
>
My T is one of many anti-diagonals of your Ts.
--
|
|
