User talk:TZalanL

September 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Cantor's diagonal argument, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you have trouble understanding the argument, please ask at Reference desk/Mathematics. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:16, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your quick reply and contribution, tbh, I didn't know the related policy, but I'll keep it in my mind. Have a nice day, cheers.  TZalanL (talk) 19:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


 * For what it’s worth, what’s wrong with your “note” is that you only showed that that particular attempted enumeration does not enumerate the set of all sequences with all the 1’s consecutively at the start. Cantor’s diagonal argument shows that every attempted enumeration of the reals can’t work, not just one particular one. Basically you are affirming the consequent. In fact, the following is a perfectly good enumeration of T, showing that it is countable: (1 1 1… ad infinitum), (1 0 0 0…), (1 1 0 0…), and so forth. You’re also wrong that we cannot compare infinite sequences’ terms for inequality or equality, because sequences are just functions of natural numbers and it always makes sense to compare the value of two different functions with the same domain at a particular point.—Jasper Deng (talk) 23:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)