Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Distinguishability argument x Cantor's arguments?
Replies: 15   Last Post: Jan 9, 2013 4:32 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
george

Posts: 800
Registered: 8/5/08
Re: Distinguishability argument x Cantor's arguments?
Posted: Jan 8, 2013 11:27 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jan 3, 9:19 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> because
> no infinite diagonal of a Cantor list can be defined


DANG, you're stupid.
THERE IS *NO*SUCH*THING*AS* "a Cantor list"
IN THIS CONTEXT! Cantor is REFUTING the list!
Cantor is REBUTTING the list! The list comes FROM YOU!
IT'S YOUR list! YOU allege that it is well-defined and that
it contains all the reals!
But you also allege that there are only countably many reals and
that they are all definable!
In that case, a definable list of all the definable reals IS YOURS
*AND*NOT*
Cantor's! If THAT list exists, then THE INFINITE DIAGONAL OF IT
*CAN*BE*AND*IS*
*TRIVIALLY* defined! It is just "the real whose nth place is the nth
place of the nth-defined real ON YOUR, NOT CANTOR'S, list."
It's YOUR list and THAT'S *YOUR* definition of its diagonal!
And if that diagonal can be defined then THE ANTI-diagonal CAN ALSO be
defined!
For ANY DEFINED bit-string, its complement IS WELL-defined!
The nth digit of the complement is 1 - <the nth digit of the original
string>.
If the base is 10 then the nth digit of the anti-diagonal is just 9 -
the nth digit of the diagonal!
THESE ARE TRIVIAL, SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD definitions!
ANYthing defined this way CAN BE *AND*IS*WELL*- defined!

However, if the list of all definable reals were ITSELF definable,
then its anti-diagonal
would be definable and WE WOULD HAVE A CONTRADICTION that the this
definition
of "the anti-diagonal-of-the-list-of-all-definable-reals" both WAS
definable (since the
above is a definition) AND WAS NOT definable (since it differs from
every row of the
list of definable reals). Conclusion: the list of all definable reals
IS NOT ITSELF
DEFINABLE! And it most certainly is NOT a CANTOR list!

IT'S

* YOUR *

DELUSION

THAT *YOUR* list of all definable reals is definable, and yoru much
deeper
delusion that your list of all definable reals lists all the reals!

that YOUR list



Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.