I hope the thread title is a reasonable summary but let me start by explaining how I got there before I tell you the simple question, as I may have also made errors along the way. Bear in mind I consider my mathematical knowledge to be better than the vast majority of people, but I did fail maths at college level, so this topic is right on the border of my understanding.
I started by considering the fact that you can bisect any rectangle in an infinite number of ways. In other words, there are an infinite number of straight lines that will divide a given rectangle into two equal halves (this will be achieved by any straight line that passes through the centre of the rectangle).
It then occurred to me you could also divide a rectangle into two equal halves with a single curved line, and clearly there are also an infinite number of ways of doing that. My question is, is this a bigger infinity than the first one?
As far as I can tell from a little light Googling of the topic, the cardinality of the first set is equal to that of the reals (a pretty obvious result, as you can represent it graphically by the equation y = ax, where a is in the set of real numbers). Intuitively (which is often wrong in mathematics, particularly with infinite sets) it feels like the number of curved lines (the second set) should be greater, as there are more degrees of freedom. But this link suggests (if I am right that what we are looking at here is the set of continuous functions) that the cardinality of that set is also equal to the cardinality of the reals. Some of the maths on that page isn’t explained clearly enough to me, the layman, so any help would be appreciated - thanks!
This isn’t homework, just curious musings from an amateur with an interest in mathematics.