Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.



Re: Only for mathematicians!
Posted:
Aug 28, 2014 4:20 PM


mueckenh@rz.fhaugsburg.de writes:
> On Thursday, 28 August 2014 19:23:14 UTC+2, Virgil wrote: <snip> >> False! Cantor said that the naturals collectively could index the >> collection of positive rationals, not the one natural could do it all. > > Nonsense. How would he do that?
Bu showing, as you and other have done here, an explicit bijection from N to Q (or Q+).
> There is no other way than to show > something for all naturl nunbers (or to show it for every natural > number and to claim that it was shown for all).
Watch the pea, see the shells move. Is under any? Is not under all? Is it not under every shell?
> Cantor shows that every natural is mapped on a rational and vice > versa.
A fact of set theory and of WMaths.
> I show that every natural n that according to Cantor is mapped on a > rational q_n, in another mapping is mapped on an infinite set s_n of > not indexed rationals les than n.
A fact of set theory and of WMaths.
What is missing (again and again) is a formula that's true is set theory and false in WMaths. Same maths, deceptive words.
<snip>  Ben.



