novaBBS - sci.math - Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?

Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?

<334b9129-a077-45fc-8496-18c10ddf8d60n@googlegroups.com>

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=66916&group=sci.math#66916

X-Received: by 2002:a0c:e849:: with SMTP id l9mr10865533qvo.41.1626509400263;
Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:31c5:: with SMTP id x188mr17939586ybx.185.1626509400072;
Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!usenet.pasdenom.info!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=152.70.37.77; posting-account=yWkoTgoAAAADHfyXMvmqmCxza6ANA67X
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.70.37.77
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <334b9129-a077-45fc-8496-18c10ddf8d60n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?
From: 2680830...@qq.com (Iosephus Granicae)
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 08:10:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

by: Iosephus Granicae - Sat, 17 Jul 2021 08:09 UTC

I recently saw this article while browsing the net:
https://vixra.org/abs/2106.0160
which is again another refutation (no matter right or wrong) of Cantor‘s Diagonal Method, and another claim of Real Number Set being countable.
I know here a lot of people are interested in this topic, so I'm glad to listen to your opinions. Do you think this author gave a correct proof?

Re: Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?

<7664c2de-c82d-40d8-81c4-db08eccb7d45n@googlegroups.com>

copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=66927&group=sci.math#66927

copy link Newsgroups: sci.math

X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4e73:: with SMTP id ec19mr14425761qvb.16.1626511556632;
Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:7d04:: with SMTP id y4mr17461734ybc.348.1626511556451;
Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 01:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <334b9129-a077-45fc-8496-18c10ddf8d60n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=75.172.111.74; posting-account=_-PQygoAAAAciOn_89sZIlnxfb74FzXU
NNTP-Posting-Host: 75.172.111.74
References: <334b9129-a077-45fc-8496-18c10ddf8d60n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <7664c2de-c82d-40d8-81c4-db08eccb7d45n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?
From: ross.fin...@gmail.com (Ross A. Finlayson)
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 08:45:56 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 1804

by: Ross A. Finlayson - Sat, 17 Jul 2021 08:45 UTC

On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 1:10:06 AM UTC-7, 26808...@qq.com wrote:
> I recently saw this article while browsing the net:
> https://vixra.org/abs/2106.0160
> which is again another refutation (no matter right or wrong) of Cantor‘s Diagonal Method, and another claim of Real Number Set being countable.
> I know here a lot of people are interested in this topic, so I'm glad to listen to your opinions. Do you think this author gave a correct proof?

No, it works up that sweep is unique a counterexample about the line reals,
then that the rationals are dense is about the signal reals.

"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds

tech / sci.math / Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?

Subject	Author
Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?	Iosephus Granicae
Re: Recent New Refutation of Diagonal Method?	Ross A. Finlayson