Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vatepo$l9ks$1@dont-email.me>

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

Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: Unit fractions...
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:49:44 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <vatepo$l9ks$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vaohb6$3li18$2@dont-email.me> <vaojl0$3li18$4@dont-email.me>
 <vapid1$3uanr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 23:49:45 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="52205d2e02d95465ac4101a55f1e89ed";
	logging-data="698012"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+qhwSPLldJq0JPNaQKKIDajnMCHEjwPSg="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:uqw+QsIUj7JJ8PUfHTnK4NDnyKo=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vapid1$3uanr$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2283

On 8/29/2024 3:26 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> After serious thinking Chris M. Thomasson wrote :
>> On 8/28/2024 6:02 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> Just a little plot I did for Moebius and WM using unit fractions on 
>>> any line in n-ary space. 3d here...
>>>
>>> https://i.ibb.co/9n71tZf/ct-pov.png
>>>
>>> https://i.ibb.co/0hXnPpf/ct-pov.png
>>>
>>
>> Wrt WM. Are his dark numbers, say plotting unit fractions on a line. 
>> Okay. Well, they will never hit zero even though they tend to zero. 
>> So, are WM's dark numbers the residue between 0 and any unit fraction, 
>> so to speak? So, 1/0 is not a unit fraction but 
>> 1/(really_large_natural_number) is? Still finite but I was wondering 
>> about the dark parts?
> 
> They are in his imagination only. He simply "wants" them to exist so 
> that he can use them to refute Cantor's diagonal argument about |Q| = 
> |N|. He thinks numbers must be identified in order to pair them to show 
> a bijection. He also thinks that failing to show a bijection means that 
> there is no bijection.

Some more experiments just for fun:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/Acx98dhJjkV6QBPX/