Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Moebius Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: hot to write out this summation: Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 20:10:42 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: <6d-cnawPEIZMQhz7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> Reply-To: invalid@example.invalid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2024 20:10:43 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f95d04fcea58ec89d08771251018277a"; logging-data="1234526"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18LXDF7SDihkT1MdaFIgoaz" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:LUk421I/f09RNsSCsz4RWlHliZ0= Content-Language: de-DE In-Reply-To: Bytes: 2346 Am 01.07.2024 um 19:54 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > On 7/1/2024 10:12 AM, Moebius wrote: > I was just thinking that each iterate of the .(0)(1) is a real number... Ok, you really make me laugh, sorry. The point is that you are using an _undefined_ expression here. It's like claiming [in the context of the real numbers] that 1/x tends to 1/0 as x tends to 0, or something like that. I other words, there IS NO "iterate of the .(0)(1)" as there is no (referent of) ".(0)(1)". At least not in my book. :-P You already wrote down what you meant: r[0] = .01 r[1] = .0011 r[2] = .000111 r[3] = .00001111 .... Why not use the expression ".0...01...1" as a general "term" für your r's? Ok, we do not see that the number of "0"s is always identical with the numbers of "1" here. Maybe a little diagram might be helpful: .. 0 ... 0 1 ... 1 ------- ------- n-times n-times Starting with the index 1 we might (alternatively) state: s[1] = .01 s[2] = .0011 r[3] = .000111 s[4] = .00001111 .... Then we'd have: s[n] = . 0 ... 0 1 ... 1 ------- ------- n-times n-times (for n = 1, 2, 3, ...).