| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<vtiuru$16vsf$3@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: WM <wolfgang.mueckenheim@tha.de> Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: Kempner series Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:25:33 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 28 Message-ID: <vtiuru$16vsf$3@dont-email.me> References: <vt3opc$2m750$1@dont-email.me> <08b0c3b7e3c8a8faaf72785e0d4ce0b066e2f4f6@i2pn2.org> <vtgm0e$36q6u$2@dont-email.me> <e4dc5d311f23fbb2cdf438d6d1fe2ba3243b0ca3@i2pn2.org> <vtisud$16dgt$1@dont-email.me> <f5efe165ff166bed3002d09ab7fa830ff5747348@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:25:35 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9b4fafcaf6703760557e2d004aa35e1a"; logging-data="1277839"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19kBJn4XenhEINbs1Tvbg3MZTRauHjUOxw=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:tRwPfaPgkBhqQdUlTfy2VYzSrwk= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <f5efe165ff166bed3002d09ab7fa830ff5747348@i2pn2.org> On 14.04.2025 14:20, joes wrote: > Am Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:52:44 +0200 schrieb WM: >> All definable sequences of digits are finite. It wouldn't be >> possible to define infinitely many numbers individually. > I think it’s possible to define an infinite number sequence, like the > decimal expansion of e. It is not possible to define all digits. The formula provides the digit at given place , but most n are dark ad therefore cannot be give. >>>> Wrong. The denominators of the harmonic sequence are finite numbers >>>> but the diverging part consists of numbers which are larger than all >>>> definable numbers. >>> Sounds pretty infinite to me. >> None is infinite. If you cannot comprehend the meaning of "definable", >> then first try "defined". There are only finitely many numbers defined. > That is wrong already. The set N is infinite. > >> Since this remains so forever, there are also only finitely many numbers >> definable. > Does not follow if you have infinite time. There is no actually infinite time. Every second belongs to a finite time. Regards, WM >