Michael Press a crit :
> In article <49f46eb5$0$293$7a628...
> Denis Feldmann <denis.feldmann.sanss...
>> Just to reinject some math here : did you see this beautiful elementary
>> proof by Eliahu Levy : http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.0446 ?
> Seems to me that the proof is incomplete.
You are poor reader
> assumption that R is uncountable
you mean countable
we infer the existence
> of a particular function a: R -> R.
What does not seem
> to be proved is the absence of such a function if R is
> not countable.
What is proved next is that actually such a function cannot exist.
Therefore, (reductio at absurdum) R is uncountable
This is not obvious to me.