Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<be83af94deccc4cbf752c5136b2d028be591a12c@i2pn2.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!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: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 23:05:55 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <be83af94deccc4cbf752c5136b2d028be591a12c@i2pn2.org>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org>
 <0da78c91e9bc2e4dc5de13bd16e4037ceb8bdfd4@i2pn2.org>
 <vb57lf$2vud1$1@dont-email.me>
 <ee482f3fa7d24f1e4ae102374d1239ef82f7ba09@i2pn2.org>
 <vb6nn6$3a4m1$1@dont-email.me>
 <70a11fdb62b0cd34e552d39d00493a303e4cbce8@i2pn2.org>
 <vb6ti9$22b8f$1@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 03:05:55 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="771833"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vb6ti9$22b8f$1@solani.org>
Bytes: 2176
Lines: 32

On 9/3/24 7:56 AM, WM wrote:
> On 03.09.2024 13:29, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 9/3/24 6:17 AM, WM wrote:
>>> On 02.09.2024 23:43, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 9/2/24 4:37 PM, WM wrote:
>>>
>>>> Which just shows the error in the "definition" of NUF.
>>>
>>> There is no error.
>>
>> Sure there is, 
> 
> What is it? Note that better mathematicians than you have accepted the 
> definition of NUF(x).
> 
>>> Unit fractions are fixed points on the real line which differ from 
>>> each other. Therefore there is a first one. It cannot be seen. 
>>> Therefore there are dark unit fractions.
>>
>> That is not correct logic.
> 
> What?
> Unit fractions are fixed points on the real line?
> They differ from eaxh other?
> 
> Regards, WM
>  >> each other
> 

And get as close together near zero as we might desire, and thus we can 
get an infinite number of them below any given one.

Sorry, your finite logic just blows up trying to handle the infinite.