March 31st, 2019, 08:53 AM  #21  
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2015 From: Planet Earth Posts: 141 Thanks: 25  It doesn't help your argument when you don't express, them well; but it also doesn't help those pointing out how wrong you are to ignore the obvious corrections, tempting as it is: "To create a bijection between the natural numbers, N, and the real numbers in range [.1,1), R1, remove the radix point from the decimal representation of each member of R1 and assign the natural number represented by this new string to that real number."If this is what you meant, then you clearly have no understanding of what you think you are talking about. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
+++++ In short, it is even less helpful when it is easier to see why your "simple" demonstrations are wrong, than when they are just poorly expressed.  
March 31st, 2019, 10:24 AM  #22  
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,485 Thanks: 2041  Quote:
Not a natural number as usually defined, but zylo has previously relied on his own definition of natural numbers and ignored objections that his own definition renders them uncountable.  

Tags 
counting, 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 01:57 AM 
Dimensions, and numbers beyond real numbers  Elektron  Math  4  May 7th, 2017 11:47 AM 
The relationship of Counting number field & Prime numbers  SophiaRivera007  Math  4  January 15th, 2017 09:57 PM 
Counting the Irrational Numbers  zylo  Topology  67  March 5th, 2016 09:58 AM 
Relations, attributes, and counting to really big numbers  CRGreathouse  Applied Math  2  April 22nd, 2010 05:30 AM 