Re: 2N=E

on 11/4/2024, Chris M. Thomasson supposed :

On 11/4/2024 5:26 AM, Moebius wrote:

Am 04.11.2024 um 10:26 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:

On 11/4/2024 12:45 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:

Chris M. Thomasson pretended :

On 11/3/2024 2:40 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

On 11/3/2024 3:56 AM, WM wrote:

 

If all naturals are there, then no further one is [bla bla bla].

 That is implied by the MEANING of /all/. HOLY SHIT!!!
 

Sigh. There are infinite natural numbers, there is no last largest one.

 "infinite" => "infinitely many"
 

I should say infinitely many natural numbers... Sorry! ;^o

 Right.
 

Yeah, it is best to use the words 'set of' when 'all' is invoked. The set of all natural numbers is infinite while each and every one of the elements is finite. In that sense (the set of) 'all' is different from 'each' and 'every'.

>
Each and every natural number is in all of them and vise versa? Fair enough?

 Nope.
 Each and every natural number is in THE SET OF all of them.
 

>
Agreed. For some reason, I was just thinking of the infinite and different ways to represent 1.
>
1 = 1*1
1 = 1*2 - 1*1
1 = 1*3 - 1*2
1 = 4-3
1 = 3 - 1 - 1
1 = 3 - 2
...
>
lol. ;^) These are using all natural numbers. Any of them will do:
>
1 = 42-41
>
So, in this like of thinking 1 can be comprised of math in multiple ways? Is that a fucked up line of thinking? ;^o

No, that's good. That is why I mentioned partitioning, finding how many ways a certain natural number can expressed using addition.