Sujet : Re: Does the number of nines increase?
De : invalid (at) *nospam* example.invalid (Moebius)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 11. Jul 2024, 01:03:45
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v6n7h1$2436g$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Am 11.07.2024 um 01:37 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
On 7/10/2024 3:55 PM, Moebius wrote:
Am 11.07.2024 um 00:26 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>
(1, 1.4, 1.41, 1.414, ...)
>
For each element [term] [in (1, 1.4, 1.41, 1.414, ...)] there is a rational that can represent it.
>
Well, A = A? Agree!
Hint: All elements/terms in (1, 1.4, 1.41, 1.414, ...) are rational numbers. :-)
Should I add in the word finite here:
For each _finite_ element there is a rational that can represent it.
Nope. After all, each and every element (term) in (1, 1.4, 1.41, 1.414, ...) is "finite" (sort of).*)
So you wont't get anything (meaningful) by adding "finite" in this context.
Any clearer, or does it add mud to the clear waters?
It's just "superfluous" (imho). :-P
No single rational can represent the whole...
>
Right!
>
Otherwise the question would be: Which one? :-)
>
However, a real can represent [...] the whole...
>
Exactly! (!!!)
>
Fair enough?
>
Sure!
See?!
__________________________________
*) i.e. is equal to to some n/m where n,m e IN.
…