Sujet : Re: Does the number of nines increase?
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 15. Jul 2024, 14:33:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <74edd85cf4bdd0aecaee742ef35763e9d9dc8741@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 12:21:52 +0000 schrieb WM:
Le 14/07/2024 à 17:04, Moebius a écrit :
Am 14.07.2024 um 14:58 schrieb WM:
Le 13/07/2024 à 21:37, Moebius a écrit :
Am 13.07.2024 um 17:56 schrieb WM:
Le 13/07/2024 à 04:38, Moebius a écrit :
Am 12.07.2024 um 19:29 schrieb WM:
> Le 10/07/2024 à 19:58, Jim Burns a écrit :
>
>> When you say that NUF(x) doesn't changeᵂᴹ at 0 you mean that
> it does not change its value from x < 0, namely NUF(0) = 0.
>
But it changes its value from aleph_0 for each and every x > 0 to 0
at x = 0,
>
That claim has been disproved. Something that is before each and every x
0 sits at zero or at the negative real line.
As has been repeated, there is no single fixed number less than all/every
other number. However, every number has a smaller one. Do you understand
the difference?
-- Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:Objectively I am a genius.
…