On 2/6/2013 8:46 AM, WM wrote: > On 6 Feb., 02:34, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: >> On 2/5/2013 11:02 AM, WM wrote: >> >>> On 5 Feb., 17:06, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: >>> This correspondence is as impossible, as I have shown above, as >>> finding a set of natural numbers with negative sum. >> >> No. > > If you think no, then explain this: >> > Have you ever seen a Cantor-list where more than half of the > interesting sequences (a_j) of digits a_kj with k < j had infinite > length? Have you ever seen a Cantor-list with at least one of the > interesting sequences of digits having infinite length? No? Why the > heck do you believe that they play the crucial role in Cantor's > "proof"?
It is called individuation.
I imagine you have a wife.
I imagine you find parts of her interesting.
I imagine you have arguments because of the parts of her you do not find interesting.