CANTOR DISPROOF <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< [Math]

Prev: Anders, Ebihara Re: additive versus multiplicative creation: Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #180; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: combinations of additive and multiplicative creation: Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #181; ATOM TOTALITY

From: Sylvia Else on 23 Jun 2010 05:41

On 23/06/2010 7:32 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:

>>> start with an assumption the computable
>>> reals has a finite maximum to the digit
>>> width of COMPLETE permutation set.
>>
>> That's garbled. Try again.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
> Dingo can comprehend it. You try again.

I can find no evidence that Dingo can comprehend it.

Anyway, you're trying to prove something to me, and I cannot parse that
sentence.

Sylvia.

From: Graham Cooper on 23 Jun 2010 05:50

On Jun 23, 7:41 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
> On 23/06/2010 7:32 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>> start with an assumption the computable
> >>> reals has a finite maximum to the digit
> >>> width of COMPLETE permutation set.
>
> >> That's garbled. Try again.
>
> >> Sylvia.
>
> > Dingo can comprehend it. You try again.
>
> I can find no evidence that Dingo can comprehend it.
>
> Anyway, you're trying to prove something to me, and I cannot parse that
> sentence.
>
> Sylvia.

Ok let's define complete permutation set.

With an example!!

00
01
10
11

this is a complete permutation set of digit width 2.

Does that help?

Herc

From: Sylvia Else on 23 Jun 2010 06:12

On 23/06/2010 7:50 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Jun 23, 7:41 pm, Sylvia Else<syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
>> On 23/06/2010 7:32 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>>>>> start with an assumption the computable
>>>>> reals has a finite maximum to the digit
>>>>> width of COMPLETE permutation set.
>>
>>>> That's garbled. Try again.
>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>
>>> Dingo can comprehend it. You try again.
>>
>> I can find no evidence that Dingo can comprehend it.
>>
>> Anyway, you're trying to prove something to me, and I cannot parse that
>> sentence.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
> Ok let's define complete permutation set.
>
> With an example!!
>
> 00
> 01
> 10
> 11
>
> this is a complete permutation set of digit width 2.
>
> Does that help?

It's all the different ways in which the digits 0 and 1 can be placed
into a sequence of length 2. If you're confining yourself to just those
two digits (which you can do without loss of generality), then I can
accept that as the definition of "complete permutation set of digit
width 2". That is, the expression "complete permutation set of digit
width n" is all the combinations of 0 and 1 in a sequence of length n.
Indeed there are 2^n of them.

Conversely, if the complete permutation set contains 2^n sequences, then
the digit width is defined to be n.

So far so good.

Next...

Sylvia.

From: Graham Cooper on 23 Jun 2010 06:28

On Jun 23, 8:12 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
> On 23/06/2010 7:50 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 23, 7:41 pm, Sylvia Else<syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 23/06/2010 7:32 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>>>> start with an assumption the computable
> >>>>> reals has a finite maximum to the digit
> >>>>> width of COMPLETE permutation set.
>
> >>>> That's garbled. Try again.
>
> >>>> Sylvia.
>
> >>> Dingo can comprehend it. You try again.
>
> >> I can find no evidence that Dingo can comprehend it.
>
> >> Anyway, you're trying to prove something to me, and I cannot parse that
> >> sentence.
>
> >> Sylvia.
>
> > Ok let's define complete permutation set.
>
> > With an example!!
>
> > 00
> > 01
> > 10
> > 11
>
> > this is a complete permutation set of digit width 2.
>
> > Does that help?
>
> It's all the different ways in which the digits 0 and 1 can be placed
> into a sequence of length 2. If you're confining yourself to just those
> two digits (which you can do without loss of generality), then I can
> accept that as the definition of "complete permutation set of digit
> width 2". That is, the expression "complete permutation set of digit
> width n" is all the combinations of 0 and 1 in a sequence of length n.
> Indeed there are 2^n of them.
>
> Conversely, if the complete permutation set contains 2^n sequences, then
> the digit width is defined to be n.
>
> So far so good.
>
> Next...
>
> Sylvia.

Is there a complete permutation set with digit width 1,000,000
in the list of computable reals? Use base 10.

From: Sylvia Else on 23 Jun 2010 08:02

On 23/06/2010 8:28 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
> On Jun 23, 8:12 pm, Sylvia Else<syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
>> On 23/06/2010 7:50 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 23, 7:41 pm, Sylvia Else<syl...(a)not.here.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 23/06/2010 7:32 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> start with an assumption the computable
>>>>>>> reals has a finite maximum to the digit
>>>>>>> width of COMPLETE permutation set.
>>
>>>>>> That's garbled. Try again.
>>
>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>
>>>>> Dingo can comprehend it. You try again.
>>
>>>> I can find no evidence that Dingo can comprehend it.
>>
>>>> Anyway, you're trying to prove something to me, and I cannot parse that
>>>> sentence.
>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>
>>> Ok let's define complete permutation set.
>>
>>> With an example!!
>>
>>> 00
>>> 01
>>> 10
>>> 11
>>
>>> this is a complete permutation set of digit width 2.
>>
>>> Does that help?
>>
>> It's all the different ways in which the digits 0 and 1 can be placed
>> into a sequence of length 2. If you're confining yourself to just those
>> two digits (which you can do without loss of generality), then I can
>> accept that as the definition of "complete permutation set of digit
>> width 2". That is, the expression "complete permutation set of digit
>> width n" is all the combinations of 0 and 1 in a sequence of length n.
>> Indeed there are 2^n of them.
>>
>> Conversely, if the complete permutation set contains 2^n sequences, then
>> the digit width is defined to be n.
>>
>> So far so good.
>>
>> Next...
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Is there a complete permutation set with digit width 1,000,000
> in the list of computable reals? Use base 10.

I take that to mean: Is the complete permutation set (using digits 0
thru 9) of digit width 1,000,000 a subset of the set of computable reals?

The answer is yes.

I'll add that it's also yes if any other finite positive integer is
substituted for 1,000,000.

Next....

Sylvia.