Virgil
Posts:
7,021
Registered:
1/6/11


Re: Matheology � 263
Posted:
May 13, 2013 11:36 PM


In article <d8620fe3928d4bc5bf24b16bee326346@wb17g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 14, 11:09 am, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > <4f6cc18e90b2415e83aa963e1c083...@n5g2000pbg.googlegroups.com>, > > Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > such as Virgil's favorite number! > > > > > 0.44444454444444444445444444545544444444445444444444444... > > > > That denotes, as yet, any of a range of real numbers, not any specific > > one, and whichever ones in that range Graham finds his favorite, none of > > them are anything like my favorite. > > > > Real numbers of that form are all you need to show
I don't need to show any any such numbers. > >  POINTS  >  INFINITE LIST  > > between these 2 bars! > > >< > > Here's another one > > 0.4444444444445444444444454444445444444444454444445444444... > > Remember your hero CANTOR showed you how to CONSTRUCT that number! > > You post 20 times a day the Algorithm (sic) to construct that real!
The algorithm I regularly post, and Cantor first used, is for binary sequences not decimals.
Neither type of "antidiagonal" is defined without an infinite list of sequences of the the appropriate type from which to build it, which lists you have not provided, so no antidiagonal need exist until you do. > > > Herc 

