Science Forums

Recommended Posts

test

Share on other sites

14 hours ago, sluggo said:

I don't accept Cantor's ideas of infinite sets. He declares infinite sets have an independent existence (without proof), and are complete things. By definition they are incomplete without a limit. His idea is a contradiction of terms.

His 1 to 1 correspondence is correct for some things, such as 'there are as many even integers as odd integers'.

D:{1 3 5 7 9 ...}

E:{2 4 6 8 10 ...}

There are no common elements.

We begin with finite sets from N, like {1 2 3 4}. We extend it by adding (n+1).

When does N become infinite?

Cantor claims his idea of 'transfinite' numbers was divine inspiration and he was a messenger. If true, when the paradoxes appeared, who was at fault? If Cantor, was God an accomplice? Could that have been a case for 'defamation of character'?

Statistics vs Cantor one to one.

Number of members within a constant interval of N, 1 thru 100.

Even, 50/100 = .50

Squares, 10/100 = .10

Cubes, 4/100 =.04

Cantor's 1 to 1 correspondence is not compatible with statistics.

It yields 1.00 for the above classes.

Statistics is applied math concepts to a broad range of human activities, used daily around the world.

After years of effort, I have a paper that exposes his errors in the diagonal argument.

Ah well. I am the fool for thinking I was dealing with a rational person.

Share on other sites

On 2/27/2024 at 4:33 AM, QuarkH said:

Ah well. I am the fool for thinking I was dealing with a rational person.

That's the canned answer I get from every forum, when the poster cannot accept the possibility they may be wrong.

It's unlikely they ever tried to disprove Cantor's diagonal argument, and accepted it based on authority figures, science be decree.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

Only 75 emoji are allowed.