Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: FAILURE OF THE DISTINGUISHABILITY ARGUMENT. THE TRIUMPH OF CANTOR:
THE REALS ARE UNCOUNTABLE!

Replies: 47   Last Post: Jan 12, 2013 11:33 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 ross.finlayson@gmail.com Posts: 2,720 Registered: 2/15/09
Re: FAILURE OF THE DISTINGUISHABILITY ARGUMENT. THE TRIUMPH OF
CANTOR: THE REALS ARE UNCOUNTABLE!

Posted: Jan 11, 2013 10:57 AM

On Jan 11, 12:54 am, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 10, 10:12 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On 10 Jan., 19:11, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 10, 9:08 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
> > > > On 10 Jan., 18:47, Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Your binary tree have UNCOUNTABLY many paths each defined as a
> > > sequence of labels of its NODES, even though it has countably many
> > > nodes. That's what you are not getting. Anyhow.

>
> > I would easily get it if you could identify a path that supports your
> > assertion by being identified by nodes. Prove your claim by
> > identifying a path that is missing and tell me by what combination of
> > nodes you identified it. Unless you cannot do that I think that your
> > babbling about more than countably many paths is of the same quality
> > as your babbling about Cantor's statements, which you obviously have
> > never read, let alone understood.

>
> > Regards, WM
>
> I already SHOWED you that path by diagonalizing each countable set of
> infinite paths of the complete infinite binary tree, but you REFUSE to
> see it as usual. This is a trivial corollary of Cantor's argument. It
> deal with such level of thought that make you derive silly and
> ridiculous statements all of which are frankly erroneous.
>
> You see to like the concept of definable reals although frankly
> speaking you yourself do not know exactly that is and how to deal with
> it. Anyhow
>
> Zuhair

1) rays through countably many ordinal points are dense in the paths

2) a breadth-first traversal of the tree see the antidiagonal result
not follow, and traverses

These are generally refused, or, more often: ignored.

Regards,

Ross Finlayson