Driver
Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011
|
In the same thread,
Joe repeats his cardinal sin:
| Quote | | I have proven that [Cantor's] one-to-one correspondence is contrived,rather than derived, with respect to infinite sets in which one set is a proper subset of the other. That means his one-to-one correspondence is not what it appears as obviously there isn’t one and only one match between the two sets. |
Mapou smites infinity thus:
| Quote | Infinity is crackpottery for a surprisingly simple reason.
Compared to infinity any finite quantity is infinitely small.
|
and
| Quote | 1. Since no machine in existence can subtract any number from infinity, infinity is bogus.
2. Since a finite number is infinitely smaller than infinity, infinity is bogus.
I rest my case. |
Well done boys. If infinity is a window, you've licked it good.
ETA: link
and bonus Mapou:
| Quote | | Motion is caused by the universe correcting a violation to the conservation of nothing. |
--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray
[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin
|
