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

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Graham Cooper Posts: 4,495 Registered: 5/20/10
Re: |R| > oo
Posted: Mar 8, 2013 7:27 PM

On Mar 8, 5:54 pm, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 8:28 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > That ANTI-ROWS don't coincide with the DIAGONAL is just semantics!
>
> Cooper Logic
>
> The DIAGONAL cannot be an ANTI-ROW

A Set of Digit Sequences LIST(_,1) LIST(_,2) LIST(_,3)...
whether the 1st Ordinate Bijects N (covers every row) is irrelevant
No digit LIST(X,n) =/= LIST(X,n)

This is a Semantic Tautology ABOUT LISTS
based on double negation of digits
not about any particular LIST content!

>
> The DIAGONAL can be any SEQUENCE

List 3x3
0.443
0.234
0.564
0.545 missing!

List 4x4
0.3456
0.6553
0.4344
0.5343
0.4654 missing!

ALL LISTS! SOMETHING MISSING!

-----------------------------------------------

MY PROOF:

INFINITE LIST SAMPLE 30X30

0.234..
0.432..
0.343..
......
......
......

ALL DIGIT SEQUENCES ON DIAGONAL
{D|DIAGONAL} = {A|ANTI-DIAGONAL}
_______________________________

INFINITE LIST SAMPLE 31X31

0.234..
0.432..
0.343..
......
......
......

ALL DIGIT SEQUENCES ON DIAGONAL
{D|DIAGONAL} = {A|ANTI-DIAGONAL}
_______________________________

FOR INFINITE LISTS OF REALS
ANTI-DIAGONALISATION IS EQUIVALENT TO SORTING

AND *THAT* IS COMPUTABLE!

UNLIKE YOUR FALSE ANTI-DIAOGNALISATION CLAIMS of

"Set Sizes > INFINITY"

Herc
--
www.BLoCKPROLOG.com