Sujet : Re: how
De : invalid (at) *nospam* example.invalid (Moebius)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 14. Jun 2024, 22:43:39
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v4idib$32cg3$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Am 14.06.2024 um 20:30 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
> On 6/14/2024 1:41 AM, WM wrote:
>> Le 13/06/2024 à 20:56, "Chris M. Thomasson" a écrit :
>>> On 6/13/2024 7:56 AM, WM wrote:
>>
>>>> But never two unit fractions at the same coordinate.
>>>
>>> Well, here are two unit fractions:
>>>
>>> A = 1/2
>>> B = 1/2
>>
>> No that is only one. Please stop to be silly.
>
> How many items do I have here:
>
> A = 1/2
> B = 1/2
>
> ?
So let's read his statement the following way: "But never two (different) unit fractions at the same coordinate."
Well, it's hard to see why he feels the need to express this triviality. The rational numbers (and hence the unit fractions) are "embedded" in the reals. Hence if, say,
a e Q & b e Q and a =/= b,
then
a e IR & b e IR and a =/= b .
Extremely trivial stuff. (Hint: His "coordinate" seems to refer to a point "on the real line", i.e. to a real number.)
Fun fact: He seems to "think" that this is an _important feature_ which proves that there is a smallest unit fraction. *lol*
This guy is just gaga.
…