Sujet : Re: Replacement of Cardinality
De : invalid (at) *nospam* example.invalid (Moebius)
Groupes : sci.logic sci.mathDate : 16. Aug 2024, 01:03:26
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v9m50e$14adg$9@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Am 16.08.2024 um 01:39 schrieb Moebius:
Am 16.08.2024 um 01:35 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
On 8/15/2024 3:59 PM, Moebius wrote:
Am 16.08.2024 um 00:51 schrieb Jim Burns:
On 8/15/2024 3:37 PM, Moebius wrote:
Am 15.08.2024 um 21:28 schrieb Jim Burns:
>
Defining ⅟𝔊 to be the smallest unit fraction
isn't a claim that ⅟𝔊 exists.
>
You need an existence proof [...]
BEFORE stating a/the proper definition.
>
Proving that [a unique] mimsy borogove exist[s]
before defining [the] mimsy borogove
seems like a pretty steep hill to climb.
>
No mater what you think, in math we HAVE TO climb this hill, and we do.
>
That's a hill which I doubt we need to climb.
>
Fuck you, asshole. Want't to be the the next crank in sci.math? (After all the other cranks have left?)
>
Wrt sqrt(2), afaict anytime we create a unit square, we have the sqrt(2) in all of its irrational infinite glory as a diagonal.
Right. In the context of geometry [...]
Actually, we see/know that there is a "diagonal" of a unit square, but its length and and the length 1 are "incommensurable".
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commensurability_(mathematics)
Re: Replacement of Cardinality
Re: Replacement of Cardinality