>>14190889>The diagonal determines the complement at each position, making it different from every member different while iterating each position, but you never mention that do you nigger?
the list, being infinite, also has a sublist in which it includes all the numbers that can be built from "taking the complement at each position determined by the diagonal" (for example, you start iterating over every sequence in the list diagonally to build your "not-included number", and then I say that is the building rule of another sublist that does exist in the infinite list)
obviously, that list with the "diagonal sequences" in itself has a diagonal sequence following the same building pattern forming another sublist, this repeats infinitely of course
and by the way, what fucking consistency is that in c*ntors diagonalization that lets you play crosswords to form a "new" element, but only allows you to say the "infinite" list only has row elements? sounds like a double standard
>The first column gives a complement starting 10Oh so you changed to binary for some reason
>so what guarantees it differs from the second member of the list? the same bullshit reason you think makes the diagonal different, the third digit of the column number will be the "complement" of the third member/term/sequence 1st digit, therefore different from the second member, and if the third sequence isn't enough to make the column number different (that is an equal to the diagonal sequence) you just say the nth digit of the column sequence is the complement of the nth digit of the nth number until infinity (this is essentially the diagonalization argument)
if you still think this doesn't guarantee the column derived sequence will be different from all others you would be right, because the same applies to the diagonal number, there is zero reason not to
