Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit
 fractions?
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 12:17:10 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <vb6nn6$3a4m1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org>
 <0da78c91e9bc2e4dc5de13bd16e4037ceb8bdfd4@i2pn2.org>
 <vb57lf$2vud1$1@dont-email.me>
 <ee482f3fa7d24f1e4ae102374d1239ef82f7ba09@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2024 12:17:11 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="164307886246fed7c2d523a3420366ca";
	logging-data="3478209"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX190qGNbnskfPaJBp04Hj6aw/6T0rmdcIAY="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:RblveleUP436FcSrDIvH8DlqWrY=
In-Reply-To: <ee482f3fa7d24f1e4ae102374d1239ef82f7ba09@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 1984

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.
> 
>>
>>> as any unit fraction you might claim to be that one has a unit 
>>> fraction smaller than itself, so it wasn't the smallest.
>>
>> Your argument stems from visible unit fractions but becomes invalid in 
>> the dark domain.
> 
> But all the unit fractions are visible.

All which you can see, yes. But there are many which you cannot see.

> Thus, there is no smallest visible unit fraction as there can't be a 
> last one.

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.

Regards, WM