Re: Cantorian pseudomathematics

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

Han de Bruijn <Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

P(arbitrary natural) = [1/n -> 0 as n -> oo] 

That makes no particular sense.  The probability P(arbitrary natural)
is a number, right?  A number in [0,1], right?  I don't know what that
thing on the right is.  Is it a number?  If so, which one?

Zero perhaps or something else?

Did you mean:

   P({k}) = lim_{n->oo} 1/n

so P({k}) = 0? If so, why not write P(arbitrary natural) = 0? 

You are right, of course, but I'm trying to communicate with Virgil
in his own parlance.

Han de Bruijn

.

Quantcast