Re: abundance of irrationals!)

Dik T. Winter wrote:

> In article <fb701d3c.0504210354.4ba8efd0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (W. Mueckenheim) writes:
> > "Dik T. Winter" <Dik.Winter@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:<IF8s68.4vJ@xxxxxx>...
> ...
> > > > And 0 is enumerated by a natural number and is an element of the
> > > > sequence 1/2, 1/3, 1/4,...?
> > >
> > > Again, what do you mean here with "enumerated"? And 0 is *not* an
> > > element of that sequence.
> >
> > 1) 1/2
> > 2) 1/3
> > 4) 1/4
> > ...
> > ?) 0
>
> For no number.

This really is bizarre. If the sequence is question is the
one with n-th term a_n = 1/(n+1), then Muck is asserting the existence
of a positive integer n with 1/(n+1) = 0, so the existence
of a positive integer m with 1/m = 0. What is he smoking?

--
Robin Chapman, www.maths.ex.ac.uk/~rjc/rjc.html
"Elegance is an algorithm"
Iain M. Banks, _The Algebraist_
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: computing with characters
    ... |> However, joinis really bizarre. ... |> separator should be the leading actor. ... | "sequence" type to put the join method on. ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • how to explain this sequence of execution?
    ... I have got bizarre results from the following sequence of simple code ... Yan Huang ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... > Dik T. Winter schrieb: ... and you define the limit of a particular sequence of sets as ... the ordering relations, and a valid definition would be the following ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... > Dik T. Winter schrieb: ... and you define the limit of a particular sequence of sets as ... the ordering relations, and a valid definition would be the following ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Cantor Confusion
    ... Dik T. Winter schrieb: ... sequence by the letter N. What it is is not in the definition, ... the ordering relations, and a valid definition would be the following ...
    (sci.math)