The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

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

Topic: |R| > oo
Replies: 26   Last Post: Mar 8, 2013 8:55 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
William Hughes

Posts: 2,330
Registered: 12/7/10
Re: |R| > oo
Posted: Mar 7, 2013 3:06 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Mar 3, 12:01 am, Graham Cooper <> wrote:
> Since all above arguments must hold, the latter more absurd ones are
> enough to throw doubt on Cantors Method

Well, we finally find out why GC is posting all these lists.
However, the argument does not make sense.
It is true that at one point the Cantor proof requires
the choice of an antidiagonal function. There are many
such functions that can be chosen, each leading to a different
number which is not on the list. For some reason this
is a problem in GC 's
mind. But why should an arbitrary choice
invalidate the proof. We only need that there is at least
one antidiagonal function, so the fact that there is more
than one is of no consequence.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.