Re: how

On 4/24/2024 4:49 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:

Chris M. Thomasson pretended :

On 4/24/2024 1:38 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

On 4/24/2024 1:36 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

On 4/24/2024 1:34 PM, Moebius wrote:

Am 24.04.2024 um 22:07 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>

How can it be 100% completely filled when its unbounded?

>
Well, assume that we have a hotel with infinitely many rooms: room R1, room R2, room R3, ... If there is a guest in each and every room*), I'd say the hotel is "100% completely filled" (even though the set of room numbers is "unbounded"), isn't it?
>
________________________
>
*) Say, guest G1 in room R1, guest G2 in room R2, etc.

>
I can say that, well let create a symbol... (XYZ) hold all of the natural numbers. Therefore (XYZ) + 1 is already in (XYZ), fair enough?

>
Then I can say that (XYZ) + .5 is "inside" an interval, but its not representational wrt 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ect... ?
>
Any good, or total crap?
>
>

>
Well, if I defined an interval out of ass, well:
>
.5 = 1/2 so:
>
0, 1, 2, 3, 4
>
2 would be half of (4 - 0) / 2
>
So, a sub interval created with natural numbers? For .5, or 1/2, to be on a natural the interval would need to have an odd number of elements?
>
Crap, or kind of crap?

 The issue here is WM doesn't understand ordinals any better than anything else he has come up with.

Wondering how he got that way... .5, or 1/2, way through, 0, 1, 2
is 1 for (2 - 0) / 2 is 1
An odd finite section of the naturals gives a nice center in the naturals.
;^) lol for WM.
{4, 5, 6} 5 is center because:
4 + (6 - 4) / 2 = 5
3 elements, 3 is odd, so we have a center natural... ;^)