|
|
Re: Matheology § 198
Posted:
Jan 25, 2013 8:23 AM
|
|
On Jan 25, 9:56 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 25 Jan., 09:20, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 25, 9:11 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
> > > On 25 Jan., 09:07, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 8:57 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
> > > > "Write a sequence like xxxxxxxxxx... and do never stop"
>
> > > > Perfectly acceptable finite description of an infinite sequence.
>
> > > Of course, nothing however that could be diagonalized in a Cantor-list
> > > or could be the result of diagonalization.
>
> > Why not? The diagonalization of a list with finite description is a
> > finite
> > desciption.
>
> The diagonalization of finite descriptions does not necessarily supply
> a description at all.
Nope.
If list L has a finite description, then the antidiagonal of L has
a finite description.
>
>
>
> > Consider the list with every element 0
>
> > The result of diagonalization is 111...
Note, that you said that 111... could not be the result of a
diagonalization.
|
|
