Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question
De : wyniijj5 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (wij)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 27. Sep 2024, 09:42:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <075c3b2e90abbfa6c1fee78066216f5d92dec9f9.camel@gmail.com>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Evolution 3.50.2 (3.50.2-1.fc39)
On Thu, 2024-09-26 at 15:21 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
I think my proof have presentation problems as a formal proof, but the
goal is for myself only, so not a real problem for me (P-NP problem is
very tricky to prove, mightbe worse than the "0.999...==1" false
belief).
 
By the way, "repeating decimal is irrational" (because, in short,
statement "ℚ+ℚ=ℚ" only valid in finite steps of
application. ... Contemporary axiomatic system has a serious problem,
ALL EXISTING PROOFS or knowledge should be re-examined).
 
You've claimed before that 0.999... is not equal to 1, and that
repeating decimals are irrational.  You failed to answer my
straightforward questions about these beliefs.
 
I'll try one last time.
 
We are discussing the conventionally defined *real numbers*.  If you're
using some other number system please say so, and tell us what number
system you're using.  (There are a number of such systems, including
hypperreals and surreals.)
 
What exactly do you mean by "0.999..."?  What does the ellipsis notation
mean to you?  What it means to most of us is the *limit* as the number
of 9s increases without bound.  (I can write it in more rigorous
mathematical notation, but I probably won't bother.)  Does it mean the
same thing to you?
 
Do you understand what a *limit* is?  Do you understand that the limit
of a sequence might not be a member of the sequence?
 
I will consider continuing to discuss this with you if and only if you
provide coherent answers to these questions.

Sorry that I forgot what kind of "0.999... questions" were asked by who. The email
system (USENET) is difficult for me to find things in the post history.
To keep the post short (this is not a proper thread), this file
https://sourceforge.net/projects/cscall/files/MisFiles/RealNumber2-en.txt/download
should answer your listed questions which I had disscussed many times in the
past and not willing to repeat them, of course, except there is someting new.



Date Sujet#  Auteur
26 Sep 24 * Yet another contribution to the P-NP question42nnymous109
26 Sep 24 +* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question40wij
26 Sep 24 i+* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question36nnymous109
26 Sep 24 ii+* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question3André G. Isaak
26 Sep 24 iii`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2Mike Terry
26 Sep 24 iii `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1André G. Isaak
27 Sep 24 ii+* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question28Ben Bacarisse
27 Sep 24 iii+* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question25Mike Terry
27 Sep 24 iiii+- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
28 Sep 24 iiii`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question23Ben Bacarisse
28 Sep 24 iiii +* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question10Mike Terry
28 Sep 24 iiii i+- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Jeff Barnett
29 Sep 24 iiii i`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question8Ben Bacarisse
29 Sep 24 iiii i +* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question3Keith Thompson
29 Sep 24 iiii i i`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2Mike Terry
30 Sep 24 iiii i i `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Ben Bacarisse
29 Sep 24 iiii i +* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2Mike Terry
29 Sep 24 iiii i i`- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Ben Bacarisse
29 Sep 24 iiii i `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2nnymous109
30 Sep 24 iiii i  `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Ben Bacarisse
28 Sep 24 iiii `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question12nnymous109
29 Sep 24 iiii  `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question11Ben Bacarisse
29 Sep 24 iiii   `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question10nnymous109
29 Sep 24 iiii    +- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
29 Sep 24 iiii    +- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
30 Sep 24 iiii    `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question7Ben Bacarisse
30 Sep 24 iiii     +* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question5nnymous109
30 Sep 24 iiii     i+- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
1 Oct 24 iiii     i`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question3Ben Bacarisse
3 Oct 24 iiii     i `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2nnymous109
12 Oct 24 iiii     i  `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Ben Bacarisse
3 Oct 24 iiii     `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
27 Sep 24 iii`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2nnymous109
28 Sep 24 iii `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Ben Bacarisse
30 Sep 24 ii`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question4wij
3 Oct 24 ii `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question3nnymous109
3 Oct 24 ii  `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2wij
5 Oct 24 ii   `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109
27 Sep 24 i`* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question3Keith Thompson
27 Sep 24 i `* Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question2wij
27 Sep 24 i  `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1Keith Thompson
3 Oct 24 `- Re: Yet another contribution to the P-NP question1nnymous109

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal