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? (infinitary)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 20:52:47 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <vermdv$2s24h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org>
 <50ac7044-f8c1-47d9-947f-9fa6044e1848@tha.de>
 <68b8be64-7fe8-47e7-a991-7adf14713af5@att.net> <vejmkm$e069$1@solani.org>
 <eb21591a-a60a-4baf-bdbd-afef2a69c230@att.net> <vejte9$e3ds$1@solani.org>
 <53460f91-4542-4a92-bc4b-833c2ad61e52@att.net> <ventec$255vi$2@dont-email.me>
 <venunr$2533b$4@dont-email.me> <29ce40e9-f18a-44d4-84d9-23e587cf9dea@att.net>
 <veor6u$2asus$1@dont-email.me> <2b6f9104-a927-49ee-9cf0-6ee3f82edc23@att.net>
 <verkkk$2r6kk$1@dont-email.me> <verlk6$4dv$1@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 20:52:47 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4bd95c627c8fda3b53169c2ecc552f7b";
	logging-data="3016849"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18QkJM739b9QNEgffVsZjajNebH2P0pSR8="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:l08MShwOR/VefPGcBMUuc+OXp7I=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <verlk6$4dv$1@news.muc.de>
Bytes: 2345

On 17.10.2024 20:39, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de> wrote:

>> There is a general rule not open to further discussion:
>> When doubling natural numbers we obtain even numbers which have not been
>> doubled.
>> In potential infinity we obtain more even natural numbers than have been
>> doubled.
>> In actual infinity we double ℕ and obtain neither ℕ or a subset of ℕ.
> 
> All of these "rules" are so loosely and ambiguously formulated, that they
> don't actually say anything at all - they are meaningless.

These rules are basic. You don't understand them. Perhaps too much at 
once. Start with 2n > n for every natural number. (0 is not a 
natnumber.) If you can't understand or don't believe, then there is no 
common basis for discussion.


Regards WM
>