Re: Counting taxicabs...

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:51:48 +0800, Patrick Hamlyn wrote:
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:51:48 +0800, Patrick Hamlyn quoted Nis Jørgensen:


I would claim that most (but not all) numbers cannot be expressed in
decimal notation, and thus contain no digits at all.

I like this logic. A number has too many digits to write down, so it
has no digits. You could be a statistician with logic like that.
Hell, what am I saying, you could be a politician.

I figured Nis was talking about transcendental or irrational numbers,
which of course cannot be written in full in decimal notation, but only
approximated.

x^y, where x and y are both rational numbers, yields more irrational
numbers than the set of rational numbers. (Or, at least, it approaches
infinity more quickly than the set of rational numbers does, if you
understand what I mean.)

--
Ted S.
fedya at bestweb dot net
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: .999... ?= 1
    ... Acid Pooh wrote:> ... Standard decimal notation is perhaps a bit misleading in so far it omits ... consists of infinitely much digits. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: abundance of irrationals
    ... > That is merely a prejudice of yours. ... Your position amounts to ... Numbers are not strings of digits, ... > Greeks would have found decimal notation to be quite artificial. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Counting taxicabs...
    ... Ted Schuerzinger writes: ... decimal notation, and thus contain no digits at all. ... Sets don't approach infinity. ...
    (rec.puzzles)
  • Re: Counting taxicabs...
    ... Ted Schuerzinger skrev: ... decimal notation, and thus contain no digits at all. ... The set you describe is equipotent with the rationals. ...
    (rec.puzzles)
  • Re: Relative Cardinality
    ... No problem with potential infinity. ... > Knowing all the digits of the real numbers can be done with arithmetic ... > particles, in the same order you've established. ... > not have said that your "cardinality" is the same as traditional ...
    (sci.math)