mike3
Posts:
2,396
Registered:
12/8/04


Re: What is the intuitive meaning of "nonArchimedean" for a valued field?
Posted:
May 13, 2013 11:50 PM


On May 13, 8:17 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > In article > <bf23b5089d6c459bb7975022f1dd0...@tz3g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, > > mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hi. > > > I'm curious about this. The "Archimedean property" for an _ordered_ > > field F means that given any positive elements a and b in F, with a < > > b, then there exists a natural number n such that na < b. > > Not quite as stated above. > > Given 0 < a < b there must be some natural n such that na > b. > > But if a is negative, one will have na < b for all naturals n. > > The standard ordered field of reals and all of of its subfields have > the property, but fields with infinitesimal elements do not. > 
Correct. I made a mistake/typo: it should be "na > b".

