The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

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

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Mueckenheim's Theorema Egregium
Replies: 3   Last Post: Aug 19, 2014 12:13 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Ben Bacarisse

Posts: 1,972
Registered: 7/4/07
Re: Mueckenheim's Theorema Egregium
Posted: Aug 18, 2014 5:11 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply writes:

> On Monday, 18 August 2014 21:20:21 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote:
>> We have a Finite Definition for "Complete Ordered Field".
>> We Assume the Set of Real Numbers is a Complete Ordered Field.
>> We have a FInite Definition of Decimal Sequence.
>> We Prove Every Decimal Sequence Represents a Real Number, and vice versa.
>> We have a Finite Definition of Countability.
>> We have a Finite Definition of a List of Real Number.
>> We have a Finite Definition of an Anti-Diagonal of a List.
>> We have Proof, written in a Finite Number of Steps, that No List of
>> Real Numbers Contains its Anti-Diagonal.

>> What's the Problem?
> All finite definitions belong to a set that is not uncountable.

From your book:

Die Menge der rationalen Zahlen ist Q = { m/n | m e Z /\ n e N }
Die Menge der reellen Zahlen ist R = { x | x besitzt eine Dezimaldarstellung }

If the decimals must all be finite, Q = R.


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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.