![]() |
February 7th, 2019, 03:11 PM | #11 |
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,298 Thanks: 1971 | So there is 1 natural number corresponding to 1 place digit. I'm not sure what you mean by that or how it would relate, if at all, to your previous posts here. Can you specify the natural numbers you are referring to for n = 0, 1, 2 and 3?
|
![]() |
February 7th, 2019, 03:22 PM | #12 | |||
Senior Member Joined: Jun 2014 From: USA Posts: 479 Thanks: 36 | Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As you've been told time and time again, infinity is not a natural number. The ordinal $\omega$ is a limit ordinal, which is to say that it is a set containing all of the finite ordinals. There is no ordinal number $k$ such that $k < \omega$ and $k + 1 = \omega$. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_number Is there a point to all of this? I think you may have officially lost it. It's as though you are regressing, which I didn't think was possible. I find cranks fascinating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person) "The second book of the mathematician and popular author Martin Gardner was a study of crank beliefs, Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science. More recently, the mathematician Underwood Dudley has written a series of books on mathematical cranks, including The Trisectors, Mathematical Cranks, and Numerology: Or, What Pythagoras Wrought. And in a 1992 UseNet post, the mathematician John Baez humorously proposed a checklist, the Crackpot index, intended to diagnose cranky beliefs regarding contemporary physics.[6] According to these authors, virtually universal characteristics of cranks include: 1) Cranks overestimate their own knowledge and ability, and underestimate that of acknowledged experts. 2) Cranks insist that their alleged discoveries are urgently important. 3) Cranks rarely, if ever, acknowledge any error, no matter how trivial. 4) Cranks love to talk about their own beliefs, often in inappropriate social situations, but they tend to be bad listeners, being uninterested in anyone else's experience or opinions." Last edited by AplanisTophet; February 7th, 2019 at 03:28 PM. | |||
![]() |
February 7th, 2019, 03:38 PM | #13 |
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,298 Thanks: 1971 | |
![]() |
February 7th, 2019, 06:49 PM | #14 | ||
Senior Member Joined: May 2016 From: USA Posts: 1,306 Thanks: 549 | Quote:
Quote:
What people are saying is that that no infinite sequence of decimal digits, except those that start with an infinite number of zeros, can be a "natural number" as usually defined. It is not that people are being vague. It is that you do not bother to read carefully. Last edited by skipjack; February 7th, 2019 at 08:50 PM. | ||
![]() |
February 7th, 2019, 07:55 PM | #15 |
Global Moderator Joined: Oct 2008 From: London, Ontario, Canada - The Forest City Posts: 7,913 Thanks: 1112 Math Focus: Elementary mathematics and beyond |
Enough said.
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
Tags |
limit, natural, number, series |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
![]() | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Value of natural number n | panky | Algebra | 4 | May 20th, 2016 04:53 AM |
natural number multiple of another number if its digit sum equal to that number | Shen | Elementary Math | 2 | June 5th, 2014 08:50 AM |
Limit of a natural log function | kingcoke | Calculus | 7 | February 2nd, 2012 04:35 AM |
Sequences and Series - Natural Number Series | bilano99 | Algebra | 4 | October 28th, 2011 08:09 AM |
odd natural number | jblaine271 | Abstract Algebra | 3 | December 7th, 2007 05:09 PM |