On Thursday, December 5, 2013 4:09:21 AM UTC-7, WM wrote: > Am Dienstag, 3. Dezember 2013 18:42:16 UTC+1 schrieb Zeit Geist: > > > > Every rational *which is followed by infinitely many uncounted rationals* is counted at some time. This holds also for the limit since there is no last rational. I do not understand why you blind yourself (eyes wide shut) to intentionally forgetting this condition. > > > And there are Infinitely many Even Numvers following Every given Even Number. > > Of course. But first 100 % of them are inaccessible, and second, why do you believe that the infinitely many naturals are as many as the infinitely many rationals? >
Oh, that right, because I can't count that high. I see.
> > However, we can still find a Bijection between the Set of All Even Numbers and the Set of All Natural Numbers. > > Of course: |N is in bijection with |N, if you mean the pure symbols. If you mean the elemnts, then 100 % are inaccessible and you can merely by symmetry arguments assert that a bijection would be possible if the elements could be "taken". >
Yes, the "pure symbols" ( if you mean what I think ). What else do we have in Mathematics.
> > Also, if you don't think all the Rationals are counted (removed), please name at least one specific example that is Not Counted (removed). > > As you know only 0 % are accessible, for instance of the sequence (1/n). Only accessible rationals can be named. They can be enumerated by accessible naturals - like all accessible reals. >
Answer the question, please. Which rational is not counted in, say, Virgil's Enumeration of the Rationals?