On 17 Jan., 17:38, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > On 1/17/2013 4:52 AM, WM wrote: > > > On 17 Jan., 08:42, Ralf Bader <ba...@nefkom.net> wrote: > > >> In a similar way it seems to be > >> impossible for M ckenheim to grasp something actually (not in the > >> always-growing sense) countably infinite without a boundary at the far end. > > > Not at all! I consider and vivdly imagine the actually infinite set of > > all terminating decimal representations of the reals containg all > > natural numbers as indices. Alas I cannot imagine that there is > > another decimal representations of the reals which deviates from all > > of them. Can you? > > Then, do irrational numbers exist > transiently on a problem by problem > basis? (Vacuum energy numbers)
They exist in many forms but certainly not as never ending decimal representations that somehow manage to end or at least to be complete nevertheless.