My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

Math General Math Forum - For general math related discussion and news


Thanks Tree37Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
February 4th, 2019, 06:46 AM   #81
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Mar 2015
From: New Jersey

Posts: 1,720
Thanks: 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by skipjack View Post
How does the list reach a non-terminating number, given that adding finite-length numbers (for example, adding 1 to a finite-length number) always results in a finite-length number?
1) The list of natural numbers doesn't end, ie, all sequences of digits are in it.

2) Assumption: The mirror image of the digits in any real number in (0,1) exists.

3) Finite: ends. Infinite: doesn't end, endless.

How is it, that by taking one step at a time, I can embark on an endless journey?
zylo is offline  
 
February 4th, 2019, 08:06 AM   #82
Senior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2017
From: United Kingdom

Posts: 307
Thanks: 101

Math Focus: Number Theory, Algebraic Geometry
Quote:
Originally Posted by zylo View Post
1) The list of natural numbers doesn't end, ie, all sequences of digits are in it.
Consider the list of all finite strings of 1s. This list is endless (*), but, by definition, doesn't contain any strings of infinite length.

[(*) If it ended, it would have an element of maximal length, say the string consisting of n 1s, where n is some (finite) natural number. But then the string consisting of n+1 1s would be a longer string, and is still in the list as n+1 is also a (finite) natural number. This is a contradiction.]

What this example shows: the endlessness of a list of strings does not imply that the list contains strings of infinite length.
Thanks from greg1313, v8archie and JeffM1
cjem is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 09:48 AM   #83
Math Team
 
Joined: Dec 2013
From: Colombia

Posts: 7,600
Thanks: 2588

Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra
Quote:
Originally Posted by zylo View Post
1) The list of natural numbers doesn't end, ie, all sequences of digits are in it.
The list of all regular $n$-gons of unit side doesn't include a circle or a straight line.
Thanks from topsquark
v8archie is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 10:33 AM   #84
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 20,298
Thanks: 1971

Quote:
Originally Posted by zylo View Post
1) The list of natural numbers doesn't end, ie, all sequences of digits are in it.
(1) You have neither constructed such a list nor stated its existence as an assumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zylo View Post
2) Assumption: The mirror image of the digits in any real number in (0,1) exists.
(2) You haven't defined "mirror image" of a real number in (0, 1).

Quote:
Originally Posted by zylo View Post
3) How is it, that by taking one step at a time, I can embark on an endless journey?
(3) From your starting point of 1, your steps each involve adding 1, which is well-defined only for adding 1 to a finite-length number, and always gives a finite-length number. You can't reach 545454545... (which isn't finite-length) by adding 1, so you don't produce "all sequences of digits".
skipjack is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 11:05 AM   #85
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: iPhone

Posts: 387
Thanks: 61

This is simply not defined yet.
Which one is larger 222222... or 999999... (the two numbers are natural),
but $\displaystyle \frac{2222...}{9999...}=2/9=0,\overline{ 2}$.
Thanks from topsquark

Last edited by skipjack; February 4th, 2019 at 11:35 AM.
idontknow is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 11:43 AM   #86
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 20,298
Thanks: 1971

The second number has greater magnitude, but the lengths of the decimal representations are equal.
Thanks from topsquark
skipjack is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 11:46 AM   #87
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,042
Thanks: 815

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by idontknow View Post
This is simply not defined yet.
Which one is larger 222222... or 999999... (the two numbers are natural),
but $\displaystyle \frac{2222...}{9999...}=2/9=0,\overline{ 2}$.
Actually that is $\displaystyle \lim_{n \to \infty} \left ( \dfrac{2}{9} \right )^n$. Of course this number does not exist except for zylo so we can't simply say that the limit goes to 0 because the numerator and denominator do not exist.

aka The fraction does not exist except in zylo's system of numbers.

-Dan
topsquark is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 11:49 AM   #88
Global Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 20,298
Thanks: 1971

Quote:
Originally Posted by topsquark View Post
Actually that is $\displaystyle \lim_{n \to \infty} \left ( \dfrac{2}{9} \right )^n$.
I doubt you really meant that.
Thanks from topsquark
skipjack is offline  
February 4th, 2019, 01:55 PM   #89
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,042
Thanks: 815

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skipjack View Post
I doubt you really meant that.
What I was talking about is
Ha ha ha, ummmmm...

Ah well. Thanks for the catch.

-Dan
topsquark is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math

Tags
decimals, numbers, real



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Real Numbers and Natural Numbers zylo Topology 14 May 10th, 2017 02:57 AM
Dimensions, and numbers beyond real numbers Elektron Math 4 May 7th, 2017 12:47 PM
Real numbers Congeniality Math Books 2 June 10th, 2015 09:25 AM
Irrational Numbers. Repeating Decimals and Infinity? MattJ81 New Users 11 July 10th, 2010 08:51 PM
Real Numbers Tartarus Algebra 2 November 26th, 2009 02:28 PM





Copyright © 2019 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.