Prev: CANTOR'S POWER PROOF!
Next: CANTOR'S PROOF: An AD(n) =/= L(n,n) -> An AD(n) =/= L(n,n)
From: George Greene on 17 Jun 2010 15:16
On Jun 17, 2:25 am, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> A mathematician explains the intuitive notion of the missing box that
> contains the box numbers that don't contain their own box number,
> and the BIG Boxes in the even BIGGER room of boxes.

This box IS NOT "missing". It CAN'T be missing because it can't BE,
period!
It CAN'T EXIST! It is not possible for something to R all & only the
things that don't R themselves.
Would it (or would it not) R itself, in that case? YOU GET A
CONTRADICTION EITHER WAY!
This has NOTHING TO DO with boxes, containment, or infinity!
It just has to do with matching!
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: CANTOR'S POWER PROOF!
Next: CANTOR'S PROOF: An AD(n) =/= L(n,n) -> An AD(n) =/= L(n,n)