Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!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: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:07:39 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <4d19f826ec791e8f02653e99017920a058910235@i2pn2.org>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org> <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>
 <d10dbfab-9235-4fcd-a892-b407029e8f1d@att.net>
 <8b3e744d-3419-40c3-a7c6-fe59edd528a9@tha.de>
 <851e9929-8ab7-49d1-b478-e65c61fba2e3@att.net> <vd1bis$3njbp$7@dont-email.me>
 <d0da206d-e1c9-4a32-8ec7-64e1365a8f3e@att.net> <vd6v0d$qj9u$2@dont-email.me>
 <78a0f795-f1c0-4ba5-90f9-acf667968011@att.net> <vdef52$29746$3@dont-email.me>
 <aec625a9-581f-4692-b20f-831b9f121e52@att.net> <vdes49$2bj6r$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:07:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="18683"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <vdes49$2bj6r$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3373
Lines: 45

On 9/30/24 2:54 PM, WM wrote:
> On 30.09.2024 20:33, Jim Burns wrote:
>> On 9/30/2024 11:12 AM, WM wrote:
> 
>> What you are talking about aren't _our_ sets.
> 
> NUF(0) = 0 and NUF(1) = ℵo. ∀n ∈ ℕ: 1/n - 1/(n+1) > 0 shows that at no 
> point x NUF can increase by more than one step 1. It is fact with your 
> set too. I am not responsible. I only made the discovery.

Actually, it shows that at no point CAN it increase by 1.

For any finite number x, NUF(x) will be Aleph_0, and Aleph_0 when you 
attempt to "increment" it, doesn't change.

Since there is no finite value of x where NUF(x) can be 1, there is no 
point were in increments from 0 to 1, or 1 to 2, or and finite increment.

Thus, your "claim" is just another delusional lie that come out of your 
exploded to smithereen logic system.

>>
>> We have no more reason to care about _your_ "sets".
> 
> No reason even to care about mathematical basic truths like
> ∀n ∈ ℕ: 1/n - 1/(n+1) > 0 ?

Which means there is no value of 1/n where NUF(x) CAN be 1, since there 
will ALWAYS be a 1/(n+1) smaller than it

>> Unit fractions do not come into being.
> 
> But they come into sight.

And they are all there.

"Sight" isn't a property of numbers, not in the normal discussion of them.

Since you have been unable to actually DEFINE what you mean by those 
terms, they are just figments of your blown to smithereen mind,

> 
> Regards, WM
> 
>