Sujet : Re: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series
De : wolfgang.mueckenheim (at) *nospam* tha.de (WM)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 12. Mar 2025, 11:53:59
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vqrp47$2gl70$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 12.03.2025 11:22, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
WM <invalid@no.org> wrote:
What I think you're trying to say is that the sum of all terms
containing both 8 and 9 diverges. It is far from clear that this is the
case.
It is a simple fact. I recommend that you learn it from my lecture
https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~mueckenh/HI/HI02 p.15.
We can continue and remove all terms containing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,
9, 0 in the denominator without changing this.
What do you mean by "this"? What does it refer to?
Kempner has proved that the series S(9) which contains all fractions without digit 9 is converging. That implies that the remaining series S-S(9) is diverging. We ca also prove that the series S(8) which contains all fractions without digit 8 converges. That implies that the remaining series is diverging. Of course also S(8) subtracted from S-S(9) is converging, and the remainig series S-S(9)-S(8) is diverging. And so on. Only terms with digits 8 and 9 simultaneously belong to the series S-S(9)-S(8).
That means that only the terms containing all these digits together
constitute the diverging series. (*)
There are many diverging sub-series possible. I think you mean "a"
diverging series.
No, I means all of them: S-S(9)-S(8)-...-S(0) contains only terms which have digits 1234567890 in any desired order.
But that's not the end! We can remove any number, like 2025, ....
From what? 2025 isn't a digit.
Use base 2026. Then 2025 is a digit.
.... and the remaining series will converge. For proof use base 2026.
This extends to every definable number.
Meaningless. "Definable number" is itself undefined.
Definition: A natural number is "named" or "addressed" or "identified" or "(individually) defined" or "instantiated" if it can be communicated, necessarily by a finite amount of information, in the sense of Poincaré[1], such that sender and receiver understand the same and can link it by a finite initial segment (1, 2, 3, ..., n) of natural numbers to the origin 0. All other natural numbers are called dark natural numbers.
Communication can occur
- by direct description in the unary system like ||||||| or as many beeps, raps, or flashes,
- by a finite initial segment of natural numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7),
- as n-ary representation, for instance binary 111 or decimal 7,
- by indirect description like "the number of colours of the rainbow",
- by other words known to sender and receiver like "seven".
[1] "In my opinion a subject is only conceivable if it can be defined by a finite number of words."
Regards, WM
Date | Sujet | # | | Auteur |
12 Mar 25 | The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series | 426 | | WM |
12 Mar 25 |  Re: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series | 425 | | Alan Mackenzie |
12 Mar 25 |   Re: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series | 424 | | WM |
12 Mar 25 |    The non-existence of "dark numbers" [was: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series] | 423 | | Alan Mackenzie |
12 Mar 25 |     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" [was: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series] | 419 | | WM |
12 Mar 25 |      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 389 | | Alan Mackenzie |
12 Mar 25 |       Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 388 | | WM |
12 Mar 25 |        Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 387 | | Alan Mackenzie |
12 Mar 25 |         Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 6 | | Moebius |
13 Mar 25 |          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | WM |
13 Mar 25 |          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 4 | | Alan Mackenzie |
13 Mar 25 |           Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | Moebius |
13 Mar 25 |            Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 2 | | WM |
13 Mar 25 |             Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
13 Mar 25 |         Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 376 | | WM |
13 Mar 25 |          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 374 | | Alan Mackenzie |
13 Mar 25 |           Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 372 | | WM |
13 Mar 25 |            Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | joes |
13 Mar 25 |             Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 2 | | WM |
14 Mar 25 |              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
13 Mar 25 |            Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 368 | | Alan Mackenzie |
14 Mar 25 |             Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 367 | | WM |
14 Mar 25 |              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 7 | | FromTheRafters |
14 Mar 25 |               Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 6 | | WM |
14 Mar 25 |                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 5 | | FromTheRafters |
14 Mar 25 |                 Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 4 | | WM |
15 Mar 25 |                  Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | FromTheRafters |
15 Mar 25 |                   Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" (thread too long, nothing in it) | 1 | | Ross Finlayson |
15 Mar 25 |                   Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | WM |
14 Mar 25 |              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 358 | | Alan Mackenzie |
14 Mar 25 |               Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 357 | | WM |
14 Mar 25 |                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 355 | | Alan Mackenzie |
14 Mar 25 |                 Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 354 | | WM |
15 Mar 25 |                  Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 346 | | Alan Mackenzie |
15 Mar 25 |                   Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 345 | | WM |
15 Mar 25 |                    Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 4 | | joes |
15 Mar 25 |                     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | WM |
15 Mar 25 |                      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 2 | | joes |
15 Mar 25 |                       Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | WM |
15 Mar 25 |                    Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 337 | | Alan Mackenzie |
15 Mar 25 |                     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 336 | | WM |
16 Mar 25 |                      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 331 | | Alan Mackenzie |
16 Mar 25 |                       Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 330 | | WM |
16 Mar 25 |                        Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 243 | | Jim Burns |
16 Mar 25 |                         Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 242 | | WM |
16 Mar 25 |                          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 241 | | Jim Burns |
16 Mar 25 |                           Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 240 | | WM |
16 Mar 25 |                            Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 239 | | Jim Burns |
16 Mar 25 |                             Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 238 | | WM |
17 Mar 25 |                              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 237 | | Jim Burns |
17 Mar 25 |                               Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 236 | | WM |
17 Mar 25 |                                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 235 | | Jim Burns |
17 Mar 25 |                                 Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 234 | | WM |
17 Mar 25 |                                  Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 233 | | Jim Burns |
18 Mar 25 |                                   Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 232 | | WM |
18 Mar 25 |                                    Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 231 | | Jim Burns |
18 Mar 25 |                                     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 230 | | WM |
19 Mar 25 |                                      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 229 | | Jim Burns |
19 Mar 25 |                                       Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 228 | | WM |
19 Mar 25 |                                        Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 227 | | Jim Burns |
20 Mar 25 |                                         Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 226 | | WM |
20 Mar 25 |                                          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 225 | | Jim Burns |
20 Mar 25 |                                           Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 224 | | WM |
20 Mar 25 |                                            Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 223 | | Jim Burns |
21 Mar 25 |                                             Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 222 | | WM |
21 Mar 25 |                                              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 221 | | Jim Burns |
21 Mar 25 |                                               Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 220 | | WM |
21 Mar 25 |                                                The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 161 | | Alan Mackenzie |
21 Mar 25 |                                                 Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 40 | | Moebius |
21 Mar 25 |                                                  Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 37 | | Moebius |
21 Mar 25 |                                                   Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 2 | | Moebius |
21 Mar 25 |                                                    Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 1 | | Moebius |
21 Mar 25 |                                                   Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 34 | | Alan Mackenzie |
21 Mar 25 |                                                    Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 32 | | Moebius |
22 Mar 25 |                                                     Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 1 | | Ross Finlayson |
22 Mar 25 |                                                     Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 29 | | Ralf Bader |
22 Mar 25 |                                                      Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 28 | | Moebius |
22 Mar 25 |                                                       Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 2 | | Moebius |
22 Mar 25 |                                                        Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 1 | | Moebius |
23 Mar 25 |                                                       Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 25 | | Ross Finlayson |
23 Mar 25 |                                                        Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 24 | | Jim Burns |
23 Mar 25 |                                                         Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 23 | | Ross Finlayson |
24 Mar 25 |                                                          Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 19 | | Chris M. Thomasson |
24 Mar 25 |                                                           Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 18 | | Jim Burns |
24 Mar 25 |                                                            Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 11 | | Ross Finlayson |
24 Mar 25 |                                                             Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 10 | | Jim Burns |
25 Mar 25 |                                                              Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 9 | | Ross Finlayson |
25 Mar 25 |                                                               Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 3 | | Jim Burns |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 2 | | Ross Finlayson |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                 Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 1 | | Jim Burns |
25 Mar 25 |                                                               Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 5 | | Jim Burns |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 4 | | Ross Finlayson |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                 Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 3 | | Jim Burns |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                  Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 2 | | Ross Finlayson |
25 Mar 25 |                                                                   Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 1 | | Jim Burns |
26 Mar 25 |                                                            Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 6 | | Chris M. Thomasson |
27 Mar 25 |                                                             Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 5 | | Jim Burns |
27 Mar 25 |                                                              Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 4 | | FromTheRafters |
27 Mar 25 |                                                               Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 1 | | Jim Burns |
27 Mar 25 |                                                               Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 2 | | Ross Finlayson |
27 Mar 25 |                                                                Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 1 | | Ross Finlayson |
24 Mar 25 |                                                          Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 (theory of theories) | 3 | | Jim Burns |
22 Mar 25 |                                                     Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 1 | | WM |
22 Mar 25 |                                                    Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 | 1 | | WM |
22 Mar 25 |                                                  Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 2 | | WM |
22 Mar 25 |                                                 Re: The reality of sets, on a scale of 1 to 10 [Was: The non-existence of "dark numbers"] | 120 | | WM |
21 Mar 25 |                                                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | FromTheRafters |
22 Mar 25 |                                                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 55 | | Jim Burns |
16 Mar 25 |                        Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 85 | | Alan Mackenzie |
16 Mar 25 |                        Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
16 Mar 25 |                      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 4 | | joes |
15 Mar 25 |                    Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 3 | | Chris M. Thomasson |
15 Mar 25 |                  Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 7 | | joes |
14 Mar 25 |                Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
14 Mar 25 |              Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
14 Mar 25 |           Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | Chris M. Thomasson |
13 Mar 25 |          Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 1 | | joes |
13 Mar 25 |         Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" | 4 | | Ben Bacarisse |
12 Mar 25 |      Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" [was: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series] | 29 | | Jim Burns |
12 Mar 25 |     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" [was: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series] | 2 | | FromTheRafters |
12 Mar 25 |     Re: The non-existence of "dark numbers" [was: The existence of dark numbers proven by the thinned out harmonic series] | 1 | | Jim Burns |