On 7 Mai, 10:09, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > In article > <4f39f1c3-6551-4e0d-9f20-02d1a9bf9...@g9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>, > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > On 7 Mai, 00:14, Dan <dan.ms.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 0.11111...... > > > should also be a valid real number . > > > Infinite digits ,corresponding to an infinite row, are as valid as > > > infinite digits of the columns . > > > 0.11111...... it is not in the list > > > 0.1 > > 0.11 > > 0.111 > > ... > > But, just like |N is the limit of the sequence of FISONs, > it is the limit of your sequence. > Yes, it is the limit that is not a term of the sequence. So there are never all natural numbers in a number as indices. The union of lines cannot contain more elements than one line contains. On the other hand, according to set theory, the union of all lines contains more indices, namely |N, than than all lines. Contradiction. >
>>>> the following list should not satisfy > > > > your symmetry expectations, should it? > > > > 1 > > > 2,1 > > > 3,2,1 > > > . . . . > > > . . . . > > > you didn't even write your own example correctly > > > I did not intend that. > > You have written exactly than many times.
I did not intend what Dan might have assumed. I intended exactly what I wrote.
> But having been shown how it destroys your own position, you now try to > distance yourself from it.