Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 04:02:48 +1100
David
Well, I still don't understand how computing the floor of a rational
is different from computing the floor of a rational real in the way
you claim. It's not the main point of the thread though, I guess.
No, but its the part that caught my eye as well.
I can't see any difference in the floor function, which essentially maps Q or R onto N.
I can see a difference with a function I might call rat(x), which maps x onto the lowest rational less than or equal to x; this defined over Q but not over R. (It maps Q -> Q but not R -> Q). That seems a different thing though.
.
- References:
- The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: djrt20
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: William Elliot
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: djrt20
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: David W . Cantrell
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: djrt20
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: David W . Cantrell
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: djrt20
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: David W . Cantrell
- Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- From: djrt20
- The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- Prev by Date: Re: Semantics of First-Order Languages
- Next by Date: Re: Largest Set in ZFC?
- Previous by thread: Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- Next by thread: Re: The rational number 5 and the real number 5
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|