Sketched this out this morning and it’s been bugging me:
- If we enumerate ℚ with each element as its decimal expansion, we know that any new number we make a la the old diagonalization trick must be irrational, else we’d have a reductio proving ℚ‘s uncountability
- This is true irrespective of which enumeration/method of “tweaking” the diagonal we pick
- So make the following map for the digits of the diagonal:
- $0 \rightarrow 1$
- $1,2 \rightarrow 4$
- $3,4 \rightarrow 2$
- $5,6 \rightarrow 8$
- $7 \rightarrow 5$
- $9 \rightarrow 7$
- Then pick an enumeration which cycles through ℚ in a way that guarantees the above digits repeat when we apply the map
Clearly this is me being dumb somewhere but I’m not sure where exactly?
At some point, there will be $\frac 1 7 = 0.\overline{142857}$ in your enumeration of $\mathbb Q$. At that point you have to pick a digit in your new number that makes sure it is not equal to $\frac 1 7$, rendering step $4$ impossible.
Tweaking your enumeration on the go to avoid hitting $0.\overline{142857}$ indefinitely you will end up with an enumeration of (a subset of) $\mathbb Q\setminus\{\tfrac 1 7\}$. Not being on that list doesn't prove irrationality. It just proves your new number is irrational or equal to a rational number not on the list, like $\frac 1 7$.