There are two addresses in the internet by which other authors had published their work on the argument of Cantor `slash 2´.
•••
www.cantor-false.de
It gets near to the problem of incommensurable measures by the `first symbols of the chain´, but is not coming to an end.
The fact, that by a number-system, which basis — binary, decimal, hexadecimal i. e. — and length of symbol-chain ever, absolute no not rational number could be named (3,14 = 314/ 100; 3,1415 = 31415/10000 …), isn’t discovered.
Also Cantor´s circular argument, by which nothing could be proven, isn’t demonstrated.
The possibilities of infinite symbol-chains, for example the possibility to establish an unambiguous (bijective) relationship to the finite ones, isn’t worked out.
The importance of zero at the dual number system gets interpreted wrong. It has, as one of two symbols, also the possibility to be important as the leading symbol (value / place). For example the four combinations of binary numbers 00, 01, 10, 11 didn’t start at first at 1 for to get finished by 10 and 11. The symbol `zero´ isn’t only a place for a not present `one´ at that.
Unfortunately the author(s) are not named — even their address, so it´s not possible to invite for a discussion — very bad.
•••
The paper of Alexander A. Zenkin (no longer alive) also is not a complete solution to that topic. The way to his paper in the net is hard to find. But try this (ccas.ru):
The paper of Zenkin is a good basis for to discuss the difference to my papers.
Zenkin disproved the way Cantor went altogether, but failed in `using the binary number system for the real numbers presentation´. That only could be done by a bijective relation. In my opinion he didn't even do that. What do you mean?