Date: Jan 2, 2013 4:19 PM
Author: Zaljohar@gmail.com
Subject: Distinguishability argument x Cantor's arguments?
At the following post

https://groups.google.com/group/sci.logic/browse_thread/thread/548bb188f8592ae8/54765222d4dd59a9?hl=en#54765222d4dd59a9

I have presented the "distinguishability" argument. Which is an

argument of intuition, it is not formalizable so far. The impression

this argument imparts is that there are countably many reals?

On the other hand Cantor have presented many arguments all of which

are rigorously formalized in second order logic under full semantics,

and those arguments PROVED that there are uncountably many reals!

So which one we to believe?

The answer is Cantor's of course!

Why?

Because Cantor's arguments are very clear, and are formalizable in an

exact manner, so they are quite understandable and obvious. While the

distinguishability argument of mine is actually ambiguous and shredded

in mystery.The Consideration step in that argument and the analogy of

that with the Generalization step in that argument is really just an

intuitive leap nothing more nothing less.

This only demonstrates how common intuition fail at absolute infinity.

Regards

Zuhair