On May 4, 12:55 pm, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > On 5/3/2013 7:54 PM, Graham Cooper wrote: >... > > > So you claim > > > ALL ANTIDIAGONALS OF ALL PERMUTATIONS ARE MISSING! > > > I make none of these claims. > > For the record, however, I do not use phrases > like "anti-diagonal". I speak of the "constructed > number" or "constructed representation". And, in > this, there is no changing of diagonal elements of > a given list. > > And, you are quite correct that for each n, the > finite initial segment of the constructed number > will correspond with initial segments of listed > elements greater than n. >
RIGHT! This is your *trick* that has you yourselves all fooled!
Next you use a tangential argument that
0.3 0.33 0.333 ..
contains all finite initial segments of 0.333... right?