Re: Replacement of Cardinality

Am 07.08.2024 um 01:46 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

On 8/6/2024 2:02 PM, Moebius wrote:

Am 06.08.2024 um 22:21 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

On 8/6/2024 6:33 AM, Moebius wrote:

Am 06.08.2024 um 04:24 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
>

There are infinite[ly many] even[ numbers] and
there are infinite[ly many] odd[ numbers].

>
On the other hand, some even numbers are odd. :-)

>
;^D 666?
>
Ahh zero. I think its even... ;^)
>
1, 2, 3, 4, ...
>
odd, even, odd, even, ...
>
So, the pattern:
>
-2, -1, 0, 1, 2
>
even, odd, (even), odd, even

>
Yes. An integer z is even, iff there is am integer k such that z = 2k.
>
Clearly for z = 0 there is an integer k (namely 0) such that z = 2k.
>
In other words, an integer z is even if it can be deviede by 2 "without a remainder =/= 0".
>
Clearly 0 can be devided by 2 "without a remainder =/= 0": 0 / 2 = 0.
>
So 0 is an odd even number? :-)

 Hint: This was a joke. :-)
 "odd" here is meant in a colloquial sense, while "even" is meant in a technical (math.) sense. :-)
 

I say even?

 Right.  :-)
 Though still odd. lol.
 Hint: "0 is the oddest even number." (Jim Burns)
 

Well, both (odd and even) at the same time?

 Nope. Just even (math).
 

This makes me think of signed zero...
>
+0
-0
>
and just, 0?

 Right. (Try it in some computer language of your coice: If 0 == +0 ... amnd If 0 == -0 ...)
 But when used in the context of "lim" there is a certain difference. (Still "in a pure technical sense" +0 = -0 = 0."
 

0 is just zero?

 Right: 0 = +0 = -0.
 But the NOTATIONS "+0" and "-0" are used in the context of the "lim" notation, to signify if 0 is "approached" vom "right", or from "left".