Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tom Bola <Tom@bolamail.etc>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit fractions? (infinitary)
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 20:26:34 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <veef0q$8vu4$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org> <4bc3b086-247a-4547-89cc-1d47f502659d@tha.de> <ve0n4i$1vps$1@news.muc.de> <ve10qb$1p7ge$1@dont-email.me> <ve117p$vob$1@news.muc.de> <ve315q$24f8f$3@dont-email.me> <ve46vu$324$2@news.muc.de> <ve5u2i$2jobg$4@dont-email.me> <ve6329$19d5$1@news.muc.de> <ve64kl$2m0nm$4@dont-email.me> <ve66f3$19d5$2@news.muc.de> <ve683o$6c2o$1@solani.org> <ve6a23$19d5$3@news.muc.de> <ve6c3b$6esq$2@solani.org> <ve6kl1$207d$1@news.muc.de> <ve96jj$38qui$2@dont-email.me> <ve97c7$2f64$1@news.muc.de> <ve97qj$38qui$4@dont-email.me> <3f5fcf13171337f1c3d2ef84cc149be327648451@i2pn2.org> <veecr3$7rap$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 20:26:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1435a6db36836d14ff537c889ad131ef";
	logging-data="294852"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18z8MFXusoMTLWOBfhRIvCSrWJdLRxm1Os="
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wLkzjwgGSjuQ82Rfiok3arg2478=
Bytes: 2515

Am 12.10.2024 19:49:23 WM drivels:
> On 10.10.2024 21:54, joes wrote:
>> Am Thu, 10 Oct 2024 20:53:07 +0200 schrieb WM:
>>> On 10.10.2024 20:45, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>> WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> If all natnumbers are there and if 2n is greater than n, then the
>>>>> doubled numbers do not fit into ℕ.
>>>> For any finite n greater than zero, 2n is greater than n.  The same
>>>> does not hold for infinite n.
>>> There are no infinite n = natural numbers.
>> Exactly! There are furthermore no infinite doubles of naturals (2n).
> 
> But the doubles are larger. Hence after doubling the set has a smaller 
> density 

Not with the (always) Dedekind-infinite sets of *our* math on planet earth 
because these sets (can) contain the required (proper) infinite subsets.

You never are reasoning within the axioms and the rules of *our* math. 

What you are using is *your* total idiotic and total private bullshit.