### And More stupidity from keiths

keiths sez:

If {1,2,3,…} were twice as big as {2,4,6,…}, then the second set would run out of elements before the first one was exhausted.How does that even follow? Are you really that retarded? Really? And you think that you can school me? LoL!

And keiths- I was NOT responding to your sticky note post when I posted :

**Well now there is a double of the labeled elements. And with set theory that means the original are now removed. All of the odd numbers are gone keiths. They are not there. They have been relabeled as even numbers but the even numbers were already there and labeled.**

My point pertains to the sets {1,2,3,4,...} and {2,4,6,8,...}. Obvioulsy in the second set all of the odd numbers have been removed, asshole.

keiths sez:

When you say that on the journey, one choo-choo train will “always have twice as many numbers” as the other choo-choo train, you are really saying thatat every finite point in time, Choo-choo Train #1 will have (approximately) twice as many numbers as Choo-choo Train #2.

Always and forever- for infinity even- meaning at every finite point along the journey. Very good keiths. And that means the cardinality of the first set will always be greater than the second.

And to prove keiths is an imbecile, he asked:

Hey Joe, what happens when you add 1 to the LKN?

The exact thing that I have been saying, asshole. I never said the LKN was a constant.

And as further proof that he is an asshole, keiths sez:

Thank you, Joe.

keiths is thanking me for his inability to follow along? My point was that the LKN continues to grow keiths. And yet any set with the LKN as the last element would still be finite and treated as such within Set Theory.

And finally:

Finite sets and infinite sets behave differently.

That is the bald assertion, keiths. Good luck proving it. Why do people think that infinity is some sort of magical set equalizer?

As the LKN plows forward FOREVER, the set of non-negative integers will always be twice that of the set of positive even integers. You like to change labels, swap LKN for infinity- same thing, they are both never-ending, yet allegedly one label gives a decidedly different answer to the cardinality question.