Re: Calculus XOR Probability

Matt Gutting said:
Tony Orlow wrote:
Virgil said:

<snip>

If f(2) and g(2) are both defined, how can this be unless 2 is in the
domain of both?

Unless the set generated by applying f to the naturals contains 2, 2 will not
be a value used as a parameter to g. It need not be in S, which is the domain
of g. However, this means g(2) is not a natural. It's still a real number. :)

If 2 is not in S, and S is the domain of g, then g(2) is not defined. A function
is only defined over its domain.

Matt

*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***


The domains and codomains of the functions f and g are R. That means f(x) for x
in R returns a y in R as a result. If N is a proper subset of R then S will
also be a proper subset of R, because for every unique r in R but not in N
there is a unique f(r) in R but not in S. g(2) will always be defined, but may
not be in N. If that's the case, then 2 isn't in S. That's very basic. Doesn't
anyone get this? I know I'm not crazy. Am I dreaming?
--
Smiles,

Tony
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: abundance of irrationals!)
    ... Your definition of naturals is self ... >>> Order is irrelevant in constructing injections and bijections, ... >>> irrelevant in determining cardinality. ... >>> No such definition which requires a proper subset to be of smaller ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Uncountable sets in CZF?
    ... a trivial surjection from R onto any subset of N there is a bijection. ... I don't base my arguments (that the reals and naturals are equivalent) ... from some proper subset of the naturals to the reals, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: abundance of irrationals!) - rectangles of area 1.bmp [0/1]
    ... >>> A proper subset IS smaller than the superset, ... >> When TO claimed that the sets of rational and reals are of the same ... > that they are certainly NOT an equivalent set to the naturals. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinity
    ... Matt Gutting said: ... > Tony Orlow wrote: ... but who ever said that all the naturals fit in a finite ... not possible to have an infinite difference. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: a question for the anti-Cantorians
    ... >>> based on counting fails for infinite sets, because, as the Cantorians ... >>> naturals and rationals, the naturals and evens, the naturals and their ... > You can create a mapping function, ...
    (sci.math)