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

Topic: Matheology § 258
Replies: 2   Last Post: May 1, 2013 4:12 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 770
Registered: 1/29/05
Re: Matheology § 258
Posted: May 1, 2013 4:07 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Virgil <virgil@ligriv.com> writes:

> In article
> <09c10073-79cd-4fbc-b391-765f13db7a9c@k8g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
> WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

>> On 1 Mai, 11:15, Dan <dan.ms.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > It is necessary for Cantor's proof. Unless every digit exists on the
>> > > diagonal, the diagonal number is undefined in an undefined list. But
>> > > that is Cantor's claim: forall n : a_nn =/= d_n.

>> >
>> > It exists "as formula" , whether or not you know the formula .

>>
>> There are only countably many formulas. If all diagonals exist as
>> formulas, then all belong to a countable set.

>
> But if there were only countably many reals, one only needs countably
> many formulas to find the nth digit of the nth real.


In fact WM tells us that there is a single finite description
P(n,m) of the paths through the binary tree such that for every
pair of naturals n,m, P(n,m) characterises the nth digit of
the mth path.



--
Alan Smaill


Date Subject Author
5/1/13
Read Re: Matheology § 258
Alan Smaill
5/1/13
Read Re: Matheology ? 258
Virgil

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.