Sujet : Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)
De : wolfgang.mueckenheim (at) *nospam* tha.de (WM)
Groupes : sci.mathDate : 17. Dec 2024, 10:10:58
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vjrf72$1lvej$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 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 17.12.2024 00:47, Richard Damon wrote:
On 12/16/24 3:41 AM, WM wrote:
Sorry, the limit of not indexed numbers is 9/10 according to analysis and 0 according to set theory, resulting in 9/10 = 0.
Which shows that one of them is likely wrong.
Of course. It is impossible that after all n the defect
f(1, n] = 9n/10 ~ n (which is correct even according to set theory) drops to zero.
Regards, WM
Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)
Re: Incompleteness of Cantor's enumeration of the rational numbers (extra-ordinary)