Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.



Re: Cantor's absurdity, once again, why not?
Posted:
Mar 15, 2013 5:47 PM


On 15 Mrz., 20:10, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> It is equally possible to show that the two test sets equal without > looking at any single member of either.
OIt is equally possible that the sets are different because non nameable numbers are difficult to biject to each other. > > The set of naturals is the same as the union of the set of even naturals > and the set of odd naturals,
Not if there are nonnameable numbers. How could one be sure that the same amount of this stuff is in both sets? In general the second set contains twice the number as every matheologian knows by heart. > > *********************************************************************** > > WM has frequently claimed that a mapping from the set of all infinite > binary sequences to the set of paths of a CIBT is a linear mapping. > In order to show that such a mapping is a linear mapping, WM must first > show
Everything necessary to show has been shown in Matheology § 226.
Regards, WM



