86

110

cannot stand in the relation r to it. That is,
as I said, I have specified a sam of Ms that
does not stand in the one-to-one relation
r to any M, no matter what that one-
to-one relation may be. But that is as much
as to say that the exponential of the Ms
or the sum of all sams of Ms is more
multitudinous than the gath of Ms.

Therefore, the collection of all possible collections
of whole numbers is greater in multitude than the
whole collection of whole numbers. I will show
you an instance of such a collection. You
know the secundal system of arithmetical
notation, I am sure. It runs like this
1 one
10 two
11 three
100 four
101 five
110 six
etc.