Sujet : Re: Simple enough for every reader?
De : FTR (at) *nospam* nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 17. May 2025, 20:06:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Peripheral Visions
Message-ID : <100amo0$hjsf$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb
After serious thinking Chris M. Thomasson wrote :
On 5/17/2025 10:35 AM, WM wrote:
On 17.05.2025 19:20, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de> wrote:
Are you aware of the fact that in
>
{1}
{1, 2}
{1, 2, 3}
...
{1, 2, 3, ..., n}
...
>
up to every n infinitely many natural numbers of the whole set
>
{1, 2, 3, ...}
>
are missing? Infinitely many of them will never be mentioned
individually. They are dark.
>
<Yawn>
Exciting. Many readers claim(ed) that all natural numbers could be used as individuals. Further this would be a precondition for countability of infinite sets.
>
Show me a dark natural number?
666
Re: Simple enough for every reader?
Re: Simple enough for every reader?