AgentTangarine

I think we have discovered a real infinity in life, which is what this post is about. You and me commenting on each other. I may be in flat contradict...

So?

I can map a singleton on R too. No problem.

So?

But if you say it's the number of times you can map it on R it is. I can even map a single element of N to R.

I looked it up when I wrote about the alephs, and it was even the reason for my post. Seems years ago.

Who says it is? I just said you have answered with a riddle.

I don't mean that litteraly.

I can map N infinite times infinite times on R.

Then ignore it. The only riddle you gave as an actual answer is that you can map N zero times on R.

I have done that years ago already. I don't agree though. I'm not a parrot like you.

Now you take refugee behind empty verbiage. Liza is tired indeed. My wife lies in bed for a couple of hours already... I told her to come too. Three h...

That's no answer why it's false. You seriously believe you can map N zero times on R? What's your question?

But why false?

Ah, I didn't see that one! 0 times? Are you kidding?

Then what is false?

Everyone knows what conformal means.

You haven't answered one!

Yeah, that's the zillionth time you mentioned this. I haven't seen one thing to conclude you do. You only make references.

If you consider the infinite line the discrete elements on the plane, like the natural numbers on R, than the relation between the lines and RxR, the ...

You have to read what I write. There are infinite bijections between between N and . Like there are an infinite times infinite between N and R. And th...

And that's exactly where the failure lies. The relation between R and RxR is the same as the relation between R and N. R can be viewed as correspondin...

It's not so complicated as they make it. There are basically two types of infinities. Infinite countable infinities, like N and infinite times infinit...

That's for countable sets. For R this doesn't hold.

I just asked you the question how many times you can map N on R.

How can his network be different if he believes the door is open? Is he lying? Have we wrongly identified his network? If he's not lying then his beli...

Are the other 1000 all the same, under the same conditions? If he believes the door is open, why should his network be different? Is he lying?

Ecactly what I wrote. It's plain English. You can exclude the worm and still see it with closed eyes and imagination.

Okay, N^2, as you wish. Same as inf^2.

Show the correct answer then. I already gave you a link to a supposed bijection between R and RxR. How many times can N be mapped on the real line? Ju...

This is the correspondence between infinite and infxinfxinf. And if r goes to 0.04566..., or 0.005667... or 0.000556654... (you get my point, I guess....

Then prove me wrong!

N can be mapped infinite times onto . It can be mapped infinite times on a vertical linepiece. So infinite times infinite times on the square.

I have no intention to be one. But that's what they say. Like being crackpots.

Which functions? Of repeated fractions?

And anything goes!

We can! An infinite times infinite times actually. One time onto 0.1-0.9999999. This can be done an infinite times for . And an infinite times for the...

You could look at neutrinos. Offers you a glimpse how it was a fraction of a second after the bang. But I can already tell you that looks the same as ...

Light sensitivity is a function of the eyes. Seeing is a function of consciousness. You need it to see worms. To see the world. But you can exclude th...

That's what is said about geniuses in general. Like being a crackpot. Untill now I haven't seen one bit of math, only parrot references to the net. Th...

Fraenkel and Zermelo. Old-fashioned. They, like Cantor, overlook one infinity.

Yeah, whatever... Keep up your spirit of awe! Oooohh, pictures!

Webb can only show pictures. Now that makes you understand! Webb can't look at the big bang. I can. Like all people with imagination.

What on Earth are you talking about? Why should I stay silent? Because it's a silly project?

You think your brothers and sisters are interested in photographs of a 100 million year old galaxy? Nothing to be learned from that.

My brothers and sisters? My sister is not one bit interested. Like most people. Except a few "chosen" ones.

Why is that suspect?

The wizard of worlds? I didn't create it! But I do understand it. With or without Webb.

I have offered the most actual info of all...It's a waste of money. Pure thought brings you a lot further. For free. No Webb needed.

"Hubble Space Telescope. In astronomy: Dark energy …1980s astronomers began to use Type Ia supernovae as standard candles" They are standards of light...