Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: FromTheRafters Newsgroups: sci.math Subject: Re: 2N=E Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2024 16:14:18 -0500 Organization: Peripheral Visions Lines: 54 Message-ID: References: <3537899e-e951-4138-b56c-fc76340762b8@att.net> <8b31df46-1361-4dd1-aed3-1f42039af960@att.net> <84c1bb5d-67db-4d21-918a-f86cd1f815c5@att.net> Reply-To: erratic.howard@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2024 22:14:21 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="25012beb60c213514f8614ecd0876d5d"; logging-data="1194924"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19TNAOeJDjm/uC2zbayTnHCYYzWiruBnxE=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:MqEu8Luq2dQOYO4FexSFDs6kGQs= X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb X-ICQ: 1701145376 Bytes: 3576 on 11/4/2024, Chris M. Thomasson supposed : > On 11/4/2024 5:26 AM, Moebius wrote: >> Am 04.11.2024 um 10:26 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: >>> On 11/4/2024 12:45 AM, FromTheRafters wrote: >>>> Chris M. Thomasson pretended : >>>>> On 11/3/2024 2:40 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >>>>>> On 11/3/2024 3:56 AM, WM wrote: >> >>>>>>> If all naturals are there, then no further one is [bla bla bla]. >> >> That is implied by the MEANING of /all/. HOLY SHIT!!! >> >>>>>> Sigh. There are infinite natural numbers, there is no last largest one. >> >> "infinite" => "infinitely many" >> >>>>> I should say infinitely many natural numbers... Sorry! ;^o >> >> Right. >> >>>> Yeah, it is best to use the words 'set of' when 'all' is invoked. The set >>>> of all natural numbers is infinite while each and every one of the >>>> elements is finite. In that sense (the set of) 'all' is different from >>>> 'each' and 'every'. >>> >>> Each and every natural number is in all of them and vise versa? Fair >>> enough? >> >> Nope. >> >> Each and every natural number is in THE SET OF all of them. >> >> > > Agreed. For some reason, I was just thinking of the infinite and different > ways to represent 1. > > 1 = 1*1 > 1 = 1*2 - 1*1 > 1 = 1*3 - 1*2 > 1 = 4-3 > 1 = 3 - 1 - 1 > 1 = 3 - 2 > ... > > lol. ;^) These are using all natural numbers. Any of them will do: > > 1 = 42-41 > > So, in this like of thinking 1 can be comprised of math in multiple ways? Is > that a fucked up line of thinking? ;^o No, that's good. That is why I mentioned partitioning, finding how many ways a certain natural number can expressed using addition.