Prev: I'm gonna try this one more time CANTOR DISPROOF
Next: Reliability: Treating the Building & the Fault Line As One & the Same
From: Ross A. Finlayson on 14 Jun 2010 18:15
On Jun 14, 3:28 am, stevendaryl3...(a)yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough)
wrote:
> Ross A. Finlayson says...
>
> >Then I say this reasoning and the equivalency function work this way:
> >when the list starts with each element of the list, their antidiagonal
> >is 1, .111111..._2, that number is the end of the list,
>
> There is no end to the list, since there is no largest natural number.
>
> --
> Daryl McCullough
> Ithaca, NY

That's among reasons why it was described that symmetries of the
function are used to describe the elements of the list at the
beginning and "end". That is done instead of augmenting the natural
integers with a compactification with a point at infinity, which is an
agreeable enough formalism in some cases, here unnecessary. (As well,
it doesn't make use of arguments that N is implicitly compact.)

Funny there's not an end to the list but that's where it goes.

Good day,

Ross F.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Prev: I'm gonna try this one more time CANTOR DISPROOF
Next: Reliability: Treating the Building & the Fault Line As One & the Same