Virgil
Posts:
5,611
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Matheology � 263
Posted:
May 16, 2013 8:23 PM
|
|
In article
<2e280e67-4adf-45b4-a320-330324f502b9@ks18g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 17, 10:00 am, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <9d1681d3-20a0-439e-bb2c-379c6f0ea...@qz2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> > Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > USE the given f!
> >
> > You did not give any f.
> >
>
> Can you use Cantor's Definition of missing set
>
> on a Finite (sub) example or not?
No, as anyone with any sense should have been able to work out for
himself.
In fact not even for an f undefined at only one argument, because any
such f's value may still be defined at any one of the many still missing
sets, which will then no longer be a missing set.
So one cannot tell which sets are not going to be used until one knows
which sets which will be used.
.
--
|
|
