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: CANTOR'S POWESET PROOF <<<<EXPOSED<<<<
Replies: 2   Last Post: May 12, 2013 2:44 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Graham Cooper Posts: 4,495 Registered: 5/20/10
Re: CANTOR'S POWESET PROOF <<<<EXPOSED<<<<
Posted: May 12, 2013 12:49 AM

On May 8, 8:08 am, Jeff Barnett <jbb...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Graham Cooper wrote, On 5/6/2013 6:09 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > CANTOR'S POWERSET PROOF
>
> > IF SET1 has 1 - then MYSET skips 1
> > or
> > IF SET1 skips 1 - then MYSET has 1

>
> > AND
>
> > IF SET2 has 2 - then MYSET skips 2
> > or
> > IF SET2 skips 2 - then MYSET has 2

>
> > AND
>
> > IF SET3 has 3 - then MYSET skips 3
> > or
> > IF SET3 skips 3 - then MYSET has 3

>
> > AND
>
> > IF SET4 has 4 - then MYSET skips 4
> > or
> > IF SET4 skips 4 - then MYSET has 4

>
> > AND
> > ...

>
> > SO MYSET IS DIFFERENT TO ALL THOSE SETS!
>
> > |CARDINALITY| > | INFINITY |
>
> Since this was posted in comp.ai.philosophy (but probably not relevant
> there), I will respond in this group because this is the only place that
> I see it. This isn't Cantor's powerset theorem or proof. The theorem is
> simply that one cannot put the powerset of a set in 1-to-1 with the set
> itself. You have made many mistakes here: 1) your enumeration via the
> integers limits the whole idea to the denumerable, 2) there is nothing
> about 1-to-1 map here, 3) Cantor's proof works for finite sets too;
> infinity doesn't really come into it.
>
> You may or may not have proved something but I'm not what sure it is.
>
> Jeff Barnett

MYSET is EXACTLY Cantors missing set.

b = { n | ~n e PS_n }

Herc
--
www.BLoCKPROLOG.com

Date Subject Author
5/12/13 Graham Cooper
5/12/13 Virgil