CANTOR'S PROOF MUST STAND UNCHALLENGED - NO QUALIFYING QUESTIONS!

[/-\\DAM]

FROM CONSTRUCTIVIST FAQ 2

Are you disputing the following yes or no.
[CONSTRUCTIVIST]
Do you have an algorithm that given some diagonal(s) from any
permutation(s) of the list will output 1 anti-diagonal for each
diagonal given, which are all missing from the 1 list?
[CANTORIAN]
YES - PROCEED
NO - CANTOR'S PROOF TRIVIALLY DOES NOT HOLD

These are all diagonals taken from some
permutations of my secret Random List.

DIAG(L) = 0.0555789...
DIAG(L') = 0.1555789...
DIAG(L'') = 0.2555789...
DIAG(L''') = 0.3555789...
DIAG(L'''') = 0.4555789...
DIAG(L''''') = 0.5555789...
DIAG(L'''''') = 0.6555789...
DIAG(L''''''') = 0.7555789...
DIAG(L'''''''') = 0.8555789...
DIAG(L''''''''') = 0.9555789...


NOW WATCH AS ALL THE IMPUDENT FOOLS RUN AWAY!

WHERE ARE THE MISSING REALS SCI.MATH?

ANTI-DIAG1 = ????
ANTI-DIAG2 = ????
ANTI-DIAG3 = ????
ANTI-DIAG4 = ????
ANTI-DIAG5 = ????
ANTI-DIAG6 = ????
ANTI-DIAG7 = ????
ANTI-DIAG8 = ????
ANTI-DIAG9 = ????
ANTI-DIAG10 = ????


[CANTORIAN COWARD REFUSES TO ANSWER QUALIFYING QUESTION]
Yes, I have an algorithm that given one diagonal from
the list (use the identity permutation) will output one
sequence of digits that is not on the list. Since I only
need one sequence of digits that is not on the list
the diagonals from
other permutations are of no interest.

- William Hughes

[Virgil]

Post by /-\\DAM
[CANTORIAN COWARD REFUSES TO ANSWER QUALIFYING QUESTION]

But what about Cantor's FIRST proof that there cannot be any surjection
from |N to |R? Anti-Cantorians have never managed to refute that proof!