Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Replies: 83   Last Post: Jan 7, 2013 12:58 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
ross.finlayson@gmail.com

Posts: 1,182
Registered: 2/15/09
Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Posted: Jan 6, 2013 1:42 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jan 5, 10:10 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> In article
> <694aece8-90bf-400b-8663-dd86266ad...@ah9g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
>  "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Jan 5, 7:37 pm, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> > > On 1/5/2013 6:35 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 4, 10:20 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote:
> > > >> In article
> > > >> <7850ae29-08d9-49ef-8c7b-e8979e037...@m4g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
> > > >>   "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > > >>> Consider the function that is the limit of functions f(n,d) = n/d, n =
> > > >>> 0, ..., d; n, d E N.

>
> > > >> You mean the zero function?
>
> > > >> For every n, the limit of f(n,d) as d -> oo is 0, so your limit function
> > > >> would have to be the zero function: f(n,oo) = 0 for all n.
> > > >> --

>
> > > > No, none of those is the zero function, and each d->oo has it so that
> > > > d/d = 1.

>
> > > That is true.
>
> > > The problem is that as d -> oo the value at any
> > > given fixed n -> 0.

>
> > > 2/3, 2/4, 2/5, 2/6, 2/7, 2/8, 2/9, 2/10, ...
>
> > > So, the pointwise limit of the function is zero.
>
> > lim_n->d n/d = 1
>
> Since the set of values of n is finite for each value of d, no limit
> process is required, or even defined.
>
> One has f(d,d) = 1 for all d, but one does not have f(n,d) = 1 for any
> n less than d, and one has the properly defined limit:
>
>    lim_(d -> oo) f(n,d) = 0  for every n in N
> --



No, d/d = 1, n ranges from 0 to d.

lim_(n->d) n/d = 1

Then, where the limit isn't the only tool to evaluate properties of a
function, here there is a symmetry between the extents. The constant,
monotone, positive progression of values is from zero to one. And,
the sum of their differences is one. And, the complementary or
reverse equivalency function with it, sees a symmetry about 1/2.
Thus, it starts from end to beginning, as beginning to end: toward
the other extent.

Well my, my, my, that looks just like Leibniz' "naive" notion of an
infinitesimal. And, as one of the discovers of the original
infinitesimal analysis, these days well known as the integral
calculus, his notation of the integral bar S for summation and d for
differential matches it quite clearly. So, this kind of notion is at
least perfectly familiar to those familiar with the development, of
the calculus. And, in the very real, as it were, application of the
integral calculus, it is where the differential vanishes but does not
disappear, that Int 1 dx = 1.

Int_0^1 1 dx = 1
Int_0^1 1 dx =/= 0

S_0^1 dx = 1

It is for no finite differential that this is so: and for no zero
differential, in the asymptotic of differences. And, transfinite
cardinals' place in measure theory is that the measure of [0,1] = 1.

There are most certainly infinities in mathematics, and the Universe
would be its own powerset, and the reals standardly are a
construction, with rules, to support analysis, over the continuum.
The linear continuum, then as real numbers, of the trichotomy of all
scalar values, has the real numbers as defined to fulfill being both
the complete ordered field: and the sequential, the points in a line
of the linear continuum. And, from the Infinitarcalcul, there are
more of those than standard reals. Even Archimedes, was not solely,
Archimedean.

So: add (a positive quantity) to zero, it's greater than zero.

Regards,

Ross Finlayson


Date Subject Author
1/1/13
Read The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/2/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/2/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/2/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Ralf Bader
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
gus gassmann
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
gus gassmann
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
gus gassmann
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
gus gassmann
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/7/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/7/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/6/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
ross.finlayson@gmail.com
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
forbisgaryg@gmail.com
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Zaljohar@gmail.com
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/5/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/3/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
fom
1/4/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Virgil
1/2/13
Read Re: The Distinguishability argument of the Reals.
Bill Taylor

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.