Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Of Sets and EvoTARDS

-
OK the evoTARD is in full strngth now. One evoTARD axed me if the following two sets were the same size:

{0,1,2,3,...} and {1,2,3,4,...}

I said they are not. Ya see the ... after the last number means it just continues forever, ie to infinity. They both go to infinity but the first one starts one number before the second. That means that the first one will always have one element more than the second which means they are NOT the same size, by set standards.

posted by Joe G @ 11:12 AM  

4 Comments:

  • At 2:35 AM, Blogger Unknown said…

    Joe,

    You really need to study Set Theory.

    Those two sets are both countably infinite.

    Just like this one:

    {2, 4, 6, 8, 10 . . . }

    And

    {2, 4, 8, 16, 32 . . . }

    Any set which can be put into one-to-one correspondence with the natural numbers is countably infinite.

    Please don't think you can just run roughshod over more than a century of mathematics. Read up on the subject, study it before you just assert you're right.

     

  • At 6:56 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Umm I never said they were not countable infinite.

    All I said that if one set contains all the members of another AND has members the other does not, then it has a greater cardinality.

    So please don't think you can come here and not even address what I am saying and then spew you bullshit.

     

  • At 1:46 AM, Blogger Unknown said…

    Please don't think you can just assert that over a century of mathematics is incorrect.

    Please, first, take a course on Set Theory.

    I can see you're enjoying arguing with people who know more mathematics than you do. But you're wrong. Two countably infinite sets have the same cardinality.

     

  • At 7:02 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    It looks like it is neither correct nor incorrect. And no one can prove or disprove that.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home