Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Topic: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?
Replies: 44   Last Post: Jan 26, 2014 10:54 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 ross.finlayson@gmail.com Posts: 839 Registered: 2/15/09
Re: Why does Cantor's diagonal argument fail?
Posted: Jan 18, 2014 12:46 PM

On 1/18/2014 9:20 AM, John Gibson wrote:
> It doesn't fail, it's a widely accepted proof.
>
> A tard wrote in message
>
> Oh wait, you're a Google-poster. Never mind, you hopeless fuckwit.
>
>
>
>

Here I have one for you, consider the function as you draw
a line from zero to one, and: only a direct line segment
[0,1].

Among all the functions about which the antidiagonal
doesn't exist, the function you noted, in those proofs,
sees a different result, than any other function.

Then, it is widely so that for a given function, it would
be accepted. And, there's a structural conterexample to
reflect the incompleteness of that, for which it
represents a structural counterexample to reflect the
incompleteness of that. The functions of here Russell's
extraordinary and ordinary infinities, simply enough, has
that drawing a line is as mathematically consistent as
enumerating the rational points.