In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Am Montag, 9. Dezember 2013 20:13:31 UTC+1 schrieb wpih...@gmail.com: > > > > Note that this is sufficient to show there is no constructable list L, > > Cantor's enumeration of the rationals is a construction. > > > for > > > > which for any constructable 0/1 list y, y is in L. (Proof is by > > contradiction, > > > > assume L exists, then from y is in L we conclude that we can find an > > > > n in N such that y is the nth element of L. Contradiction. Thus L does > > not > > > > exist) > > I am not interested in your "proofs"
NOr are we interested in WM'sr disinterest, since his own "proofs" are universally invalid outside of WM's wild weird world of WMytheology.
> but in defining an irrational number > like the antidiagonal d by an arbitrarily large sequence of its digits d_n > (including an infinite sequence). This is impossible because for every digits > d_n there are infinitely many duplicates.
But d_n is not a digit, but a rational number at least in the notation WM has been using, so his statement is, as usual, nonsense. > > If your proof supplies a contradiction, then set theory is self > contradictory. q.e.d.
Set theories outside of WM's wild weird world of WMytheology are not subject to WM's control, and can be, and often are, self-consistent, even when, and especially when, incompatible with WM's wild weird world of WMytheology --