Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: WM Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit fractions? Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 14:22:00 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 15 Message-ID: References: <0da78c91e9bc2e4dc5de13bd16e4037ceb8bdfd4@i2pn2.org> <5d8b4ac0-3060-40df-8534-3e04bb77c12d@att.net> <7e1e3f62-1fba-4484-8e34-6ff8f1e54625@att.net> <06ee7920-eff2-4687-be98-67a89b301c93@att.net> <38ypmjbnu3EfnKYR4tSIu-WavbA@jntp> <34e11216-439f-4b11-bdff-1a252ac98f8f@att.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 14:21:59 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="16d358dadf588a51bb1a83b986aadec0"; logging-data="866136"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX198tyUr6BemlVHYGjhSyRuGWHF+m/bb8Gs=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:PxR8GG8l3znHyTJTHhMjuKotnnc= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 2044 On 06.09.2024 00:36, Python wrote: > Le 05/09/2024 à 22:44, crank Wolfgang Mückenheim, aka WM a écrit : >> >> You are mistaken. I do not conclude the latter from the former. I >> conclude the latter from the fact that NUF(0) = 0 and NUF(x>0) > 0 and >> never, at no x, NUF can increase by more than 1. > > What the Hell could mean "to increase at an x" ? Example: The function f(x) = [x] increases at every x ∈ ℕ by 1. The function NUF(x) increases at every x = unit fraction 1/n by 1. It does not increase at 0 because 0 is not a unit fraction. Regards, WM