User:RJGray/Sandbox1

Trovatore
Hi Trovatore. I have retitled the section "The disagreement about Cantor's existence proof." The new title is "A misconception about Cantor's work," which comes from Akihiro Kanamori's article "Set Theory from Cantor to Cohen." I like "misconception"—it's a great improvement over "disagreement" and it's in a quote that I can reference. Also, I made some smaller changes to the rest of the section.

Thank you for clarifying for me what mathematicians may mean by "Cantor's proof". Perron references both Cantor's 1874 article and his 1891 diagonal argument article since he uses the diagonal argument instead of Cantor's 1874 argument. Since the proof Perron gives uses a combination of Cantor's arguments from his 1874 and 1891 articles, it appears clear to me that he is using "Cantor's proof" to credit Cantor with all the arguments in the proof. If mathematicians commonly do this and someone has written this down, please send me a reference to it. I give evidence that this is how he is using "Cantor's proof" in the footnote at the end of the 3rd paragraph, but a reference would be very good to have.

By the way, I had restricted "Cantor's proof" to Cantor's published proof because "proof" is singular and I was thinking more about the history of the proof. This caused me to restrict what I viewed as "Cantor's proof" to be a proof that Cantor published. I never thought about the possibility that mathematicians might be accustomed to a different usage of "Cantor's proof." Thank you for pointing this out to me.

If you want to see my changes, they are located at User:RJGray/Sandbox2. It consists of the new section "A misconception about Cantor's work" and a two-sentence change to the 2nd paragraph of the Lead. I plan to put these changes into the article in about a week and a half.

Thanks for your help,

The New York Times article
Protesters Gather Sunday After the Killing of Rayshard Brooks (New York Times: 6/15/2020)

On Sunday a group of peaceful protesters gathered at the site where Rayshard Brooks was fatally shot in Atlanta on Friday. A decision on whether or not to lay charges in the Rayshard Brooks case could come by Wednesday. The district attorney in Fulton County, Ga., has said he will make a decision by midweek on whether to file criminal charges in the fatal police shooting of an African-American man outside a Wendy’s restaurant on Friday night, the latest killing to stir outrage over a long history of deadly violence by the police against African-Americans.

The shooting of the man, Rayshard Brooks, 27, by a white police officer came at a time when protesters have taken to the streets in cities around the country to demand changes in police practices, the downsizing of police departments, and a reckoning with racism in many sectors of society.

Mr. Brooks’s killing set off a fresh wave of the questioning and anger that has roiled the nation since the death of George Floyd, and the response from political leaders has been unusually swift, as they sought to head off a potentially explosive reaction from protesters.

Less than 24 hours after Mr. Brooks was shot, Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms of Atlanta announced that the city’s police chief had resigned. On Sunday, a spokesman for the police department said that the officer who shot Mr. Brooks had been fired.

The encounter outside the restaurant was captured on eyewitness videos, police body-camera footage and security camera footage.

The police were called to the scene on Friday night because Mr. Brooks had fallen asleep in his car on the restaurant’s drive-through line. Mr. Brooks was awakened and given a sobriety test, which he failed.

After two police officers had been on the scene for 27 minutes, much of that time talking with Mr. Brooks, one of the officers, Garrett Rolfe, attempted to handcuff him, leading to a struggle. The officers tried to stun Mr. Brooks with Tasers, and Mr. Brooks grabbed one of their Tasers and ran away, with Officer Rolfe in pursuit. Mr. Brooks turned at one point to fire the Taser back in Officer Rolfe’s direction; Officer Rolfe then pulled out his handgun and fired at Mr. Brooks three times as he was running away.

The Fulton County medical examiner’s office confirmed on Sunday that Mr. Brooks’s death was a homicide and that the cause of death was “gunshot wounds of the back.” The office’s statement said he had been hit by two shots in the back, causing “organ injuries and blood loss.”

The district attorney, Paul Howard, told CNN that the possible charges against Officer Rolfe included murder, felony murder and involuntary manslaughter. Mr. Howard said he would decide which, if any, charges to bring by midweek. (Felony murder refers to a homicide committed while committing another felony.)

“He did not seem to present any kind of threat to anyone,” Mr. Howard said of Mr. Brooks, “and so the fact that it would escalate to his death just seems unreasonable.”