>>14156973>Same as the hotel.Yup. Which has cardinality aleph null and can't fit more than that. What is your point?
>Simply map the first element to the first element of the first set, the second element to the second element of the second set, the third element to the first element of the second set, and so on for infinitely many sets with infinitely many elements.What sets are you even talking about?
>You will generate a random set containing every infinite sequence.LOL, you don't even understand your own argument. The set of infinite sequences is uncountable, so you can't have a countable set that contains every infinite sequence. An infinite sequence is countable.
You've failed yet again to explain what any of this has to do with what we're taking about. We're only talking about one infinity, an infinite sequence. You don't have any clue what you're talking about, which explains why you continue retreating from your specific claims to more vague responses that don't counter anything I said. It's rather pathetic.
To summarize:
You haven't explained why you confused "chance" with "average"
You haven't explained why you incorrectly referred to chaos and then claimed chaos theory is irrelevant.
You haven't explained why you think an infinite random sequence contains all finite sequences when an infinite sequence of 0s can be randomly generated but doesn't include any finite sequence with a 1. You're blatantly ignoring that this constitutes a mathematical proof that you're wrong.
You haven't explained why you've confused the result of a trial with how often something occurs.
You haven't explained why you think an infinite sequence is large than aleph null.
It's OK if you don't know the answers, it's not OK that you keep pretending you do.
