Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: FromTheRafters <FTR@nomail.afraid.org>
Newsgroups: sci.math
Subject: Re: How many different unit fractions are lessorequal than all unit fractions? (infinitary)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 06:03:26 -0400
Organization: Peripheral Visions
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <veat5l$3kbp8$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4rde$22fb4$2@solani.org> <vdscnj$235p$1@news.muc.de> <RJKcnSeCMNokRpz6nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> <vdto2k$1jte$1@news.muc.de> <vdu4mt$18h8h$1@dont-email.me> <vdu874$271t$2@news.muc.de> <vdua6f$18vqi$2@dont-email.me> <vdubg3$24me$1@news.muc.de> <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> <63da70aac88f4557a59f027abee5cf9c466ada76@i2pn2.org> <ve94u1$38d98$2@dont-email.me> <b310018266a59e91b1f75dcf6a9c6c3dda66d91e@i2pn2.org>
Reply-To: erratic.howard@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:03:34 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="aa41fbd92082647151a27ca92816d0ae";
	logging-data="3813160"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19U6wKOBqFsg3YlLw3gndHYG18UJS2iG6o="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:t7c5GVx6M/zGN8GnuxpadIE6ors=
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb
X-ICQ: 1701145376
Bytes: 3196

joes wrote on 10/10/2024 :
> Am Thu, 10 Oct 2024 20:03:46 +0200 schrieb WM:
>> On 09.10.2024 19:30, joes wrote:
>>> Am Wed, 09 Oct 2024 16:40:21 +0200 schrieb WM:
>>>> When we *in actual infinity* multiply all |ℕ|natural numbers by 2,
>>>> then we keep |ℕ| numbers but only half of them are smaller than ω,
>>>> i.e., are natural numbers. The other half is larger than ω.
>>> So 2N = G u {w, w+2, w+4, ..., w+w-2}?
>> If all numbers are there initially and multiplied by 2. And if every
>> number 2n is greater than n, then this is unavoidable.
>> Note the premise: If all are there. Actual infinity!
> You say w/2 were natural and comes after the darkness. What is the
> smallest such number, w/w? And what is the biggest number that comes
> before?
>
>>> But what about the limit case, the intersection of all endsegments,
>>> or the set which has lost an infinite number of elements?
>> The endsegment which has lost an infinite number of elements is empty
>> and causes an empty intersection. But infinite endsegments have not lost
>> an infinite number of numbers.
> WDYM "causes"? There is no such segment.
> WDYM "inf. endsegments"? Inf. many of them or inf. sized ones?

For years (perhaps decades) he has been told that the phrase "infinite 
endsegments" doesn't need the word infinite because each, every, and 
all of the described endsegments are infinite. He uses the word only to 
add confusion.