|
|
Re: Introducing the COOPERNALITY of a Real
Posted:
Nov 29, 2010 12:33 PM
|
|
"Tonico" <Tonicopm@yahoo.com> wrote in
On Nov 28, 11:13 am, Transfer Principle <lwal...@lausd.net> wrote:>
> "Coopernality," eh, instead of cardinality? With several other
> active threads dealing with replacements for cardinality, I
> might as well give this thread a try.
*** I'm sure you will, lwalke: how couldn't you? Nevertheless, in this
case it would probably be advisable to take some short courses in
quiromancy, black magic, hokus pokus 101, prophesy and crankology.****
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think it's GUARANTEED that your religious beliefs based on this gem
"Which box contains the box numbers of which don't contain their own box number?"
having some relevance to supersized sets will place YOU firmly in the history books as the crank of cranks.
Herc
--
Cantor's powerset proof is directly equivalent to
"Which box contains the box numbers of which don't contain their own box number?"
There isn't one! NO SURPRISE! Hence higher infinities must exist!??
This is exactly the same type of proof as anti-diagonals!
|
|
