Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (W. Mueckenheim)
- Date: 22 Apr 2005 12:42:18 -0700
Matt Gutting <tchrmatt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > Right. But neither 0 not 1 are part of the list.
> >
> As implied above, this is not the point. By the way sequences and infinite
> series are defined, the infinite sum SUM(i=1 to infinity) f(i) could simply
> be regarded as another way of writing "1", just as "2+2" is another way
> of writing "4".
It is unimportant whether there is this or another definition of a
limit. It does not matter for our sake. Each line of the Cantor list
is enumerated by a natural number. And the digits of the diagonal
fitting into these lines are all enumerated and do not constitue any
other limit.
Regards, WM
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: Virgil
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- References:
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: W. Mueckenheim
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: W. Mueckenheim
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: r.e.s.
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: W. Mueckenheim
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: r.e.s.
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: W. Mueckenheim
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: Virgil
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: W. Mueckenheim
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- From: Matt Gutting
- Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- Prev by Date: Annihilator question
- Next by Date: Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- Previous by thread: Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- Next by thread: Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|