Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit
 fractions?
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:55:33 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <1070c9cf076081177c389789a738aeda849c501d@i2pn2.org>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org> <vbums6$8kdn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbv9i7$bpjh$2@dont-email.me>
 <13c08e96ad635f8142b38d89863a80caf17a32a8@i2pn2.org>
 <vc1mfe$u3ec$2@dont-email.me>
 <4faa63d0ff8c163f01a38736aeb5732184218a29@i2pn2.org>
 <vc1uu8$u3ec$9@dont-email.me> <vc2gfb$130uk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vc44uu$1gc40$1@dont-email.me>
 <c94d6140f000f75c5e95e1acc785ebff9894a18b@i2pn2.org>
 <vc7dk3$2b1g9$2@dont-email.me> <1aabd037-86bc-47bd-b402-f6b29c5c33e4@att.net>
 <vcehl6$2boc$3@dont-email.me> <f1d14b16-2c12-4cfb-b7f5-c58cc5724f94@att.net>
 <vcguvh$hi5j$1@dont-email.me> <b7eb4682-30db-4b37-90b4-0135e995cfc1@att.net>
 <vckekf$1709o$1@dont-email.me> <298dcb6f-5f58-48b6-80e3-34260bf721f8@att.net>
 <vcn8n8$1nfqa$1@dont-email.me> <283c426f-ab1c-4ef0-a06c-1bf7d28a2cfa@att.net>
 <vcpo5e$29qe5$1@dont-email.me> <6b50a171-8127-4ce6-9bd3-2dc213638e9b@att.net>
 <vcroj3$2nfvb$2@dont-email.me> <519db81b-4a4d-417d-8cd2-7fef5a342efd@att.net>
 <6704347e-2f99-40f2-887f-de93f6fdd659@tha.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:55:33 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3420036"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <6704347e-2f99-40f2-887f-de93f6fdd659@tha.de>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2360
Lines: 13

On 9/24/24 3:28 PM, WM wrote:
> On 23.09.2024 19:58, Jim Burns wrote:
>  > On 9/23/2024 8:57 AM, WM wrote:
> 
>  > a smallest unit.fraction, visibleᵂᴹ or darkᵂᴹ,
>  > is gibberish.
> 
> But the increase of NUF(x) from 0 to infinity without intermediate steps 
> is not gibberish?
> 
> Regards, WM

It shows that NUF(x) itself is the source of the giberish, as it 
presumes things that don't actually exist,