Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit fractions? Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:39:47 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <57dcb3994f147ebe5799308cad2ae1c8ac57e891@i2pn2.org> References: <4faa63d0ff8c163f01a38736aeb5732184218a29@i2pn2.org> <1aabd037-86bc-47bd-b402-f6b29c5c33e4@att.net> <298dcb6f-5f58-48b6-80e3-34260bf721f8@att.net> <283c426f-ab1c-4ef0-a06c-1bf7d28a2cfa@att.net> <6b50a171-8127-4ce6-9bd3-2dc213638e9b@att.net> <519db81b-4a4d-417d-8cd2-7fef5a342efd@att.net> <6704347e-2f99-40f2-887f-de93f6fdd659@tha.de> <8b3e744d-3419-40c3-a7c6-fe59edd528a9@tha.de> <851e9929-8ab7-49d1-b478-e65c61fba2e3@att.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:39:47 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3451800"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM"; User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 3201 Lines: 30 Am Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:51:56 +0200 schrieb WM: > On 25.09.2024 06:59, Jim Burns wrote: > > On 9/24/2024 4:37 PM, WM wrote: > > >>> Thus increasing NUF(x) from 0 to infinity WITH intermediate steps > >>> is gibberish, > > The correct (different) alternative is: infinitely.many > > unit.fractions at one point per unit.fraction, > That means NUF increases by 1 at every point occupied by a unit > fraction. Thus it increases to infinity at every positive point. > > with infinitely.many points in all. > NUF(x) distinguishes all points. How does it distinguish dark points? > > Although no more than finitely.many points can be stepped.through > > end.to.end we don't require these points to do more than _exist_ > > More.than.finitely.many can _exist_ > Yes, but they are dark. > NUF increases. At no point it can increase by more than 1. Right, and there is no point "next to" 0, so it doesn't actually "increase" by your not-definition at 0. > Even if most mathematicians are far too stupid to understand this, I > will repeat it on and on, maybe that sometime some will get it. You should try explaining it a different way. -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.