Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 14 Jan 2006 04:50:49 -0800
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
> I understand the probability a divides n when we have a uniform
> distribution on initial segments of N (although my terminology may be
> off).
Your terminology is clear enough.
> It seems you're right that the limit of these values is 1/a.
>
> But there is no uniform distribution on N, so I don't see what Han
> means there and your explanation doesn't clarify it.
Who the hell has decided that "there is no uniform distribution on N"
!?
Your logic and mine are mutually incompatible if you can't agree
upon the fact that an initial segment (1..n) of N is just N as n -> oo
..
Oh, and for the sake of "clarity", the limit of a segment (1..n) for
n -> oo "means": if you have a finite segment (1..m), then replace
it by a larger finite segment (1..n) where n > m. Recursively.
Han de Bruijn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Randy Poe
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- References:
- Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: david petry
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han . deBruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Tony Orlow
- Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- From: Jesse F. Hughes
- Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Prev by Date: Re: Dot product 3-dimensions
- Next by Date: Re: derivative of sqrt(x)
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Next by thread: Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading