```Date: Dec 24, 2012 10:26 AM
Author: george
Subject: Re: Simple Refutation of Cantor's Proof

On Dec 24, 3:01 am, Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:> +----->> | 0. 542..> | 0. 983..> | 0. 143..> | 0. 543..> | ...> v>> OK - THINK - don't back explain to me.>> You run down the Diagonal  5 8 3 ...>> IN YOUR MIND - you change each digit ONE AT A TIME>> 0.694...>> but this process NEVER STOPS>> and you NEVER CONSTRUCT A NEW DIGIT SEQUENCE!Damn, you're stupid.  INFINITY DOES *NOT*HAVE*ANY*thing to do withthis!If you don't like the infinite part, JUST PRETEND THAT IT'S A LIST OF7rational numbers that are only 7 decimal digits wide.  Guess what:There is an 8th one that IS NOT ON the list.  The anti-diagonal of asquarelist of digits IS NEVER ON the list.  It is also not unique -- youdon't haveto use 9-x to complement the digits -- ANY FUNCTION OF THEM AT ALLthat leavesnone of them the same -- for example, "6 if it's not 6 and 7 if it is6" -- wouldWORK JUST AS WELL.  THIS PROVES THERE ARE TONS AND TONS of numbers NOTON your list(if it's square).  THAT IS ALL that is going on and the question of"completion"or infinity IS NOT relevant -- the theorem ALSO holds true for FINITElists becauseit holds for ALL square  lists, PERIOD.
```