Prev: Pulley Question
Next: The set of all SUBSETS that don't contain themself -> PARADISE
From: |-|ercules on 2 Jul 2010 11:25
As the length of the list of computable reals->oo, the length of all possible digit sequences on the list->oo.

What's your explanation for what happens if the list IS infinitely long? All sequences doesn't quite make it
to infinity?? It misses some?

Herc

--
"George Greene" <greeneg(a)email.unc.edu> wrote
>> Are you really that stupid to assume ...?
>
> I don't NEED to ASSUME!
From: David R Tribble on 2 Jul 2010 11:52
|-|ercules wrote:
> As the length of the list of computable reals->oo, the length of all possible digit sequences on
> the list->oo.
>
> What's your explanation for what happens if the list IS infinitely long? All sequences doesn't quite
> make it to infinity?? It misses some?

1. Can you tell us the difference, if any, between a list that
"approaches infinitely length" and a list that "has infinite length"?

2. The infinitely-wide list contains the digit sequence .333...,
so what is the next digit sequence that follows it in the list?
From: |-|ercules on 3 Jul 2010 20:21
"David R Tribble" <david(a)tribble.com> wrote ...
> |-|ercules wrote:
>> As the length of the list of computable reals->oo, the length of all possible digit sequences on
>> the list->oo.
>>
>> What's your explanation for what happens if the list IS infinitely long? All sequences doesn't quite
>> make it to infinity?? It misses some?
>
> 1. Can you tell us the difference, if any, between a list that
> "approaches infinitely length" and a list that "has infinite length"?
>
> 2. The infinitely-wide list contains the digit sequence .333...,
> so what is the next digit sequence that follows it in the list?

I'm not sure it's worth answering these questions without you acknowledging whether you
agree with my other answers in the thread "As the length...".

Keep aus.tv in the groups if you want to ensure I will read your response.

Herc
From: George Greene on 5 Jul 2010 01:32
On Jul 2, 11:25 am, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> As the length of the list of computable reals->oo,

This is completely ridiculous. The length of the list of computable
reals
NEVER APPROACHES ANYthing! The length of the list of computable
reals IS A CONSTANT! It is ALWAYS w (the smallest infinity), AS is
the WIDTH
of that list (every real on that list is w digits wide).

> the length of all possible digit sequences on the list->oo.

This is just incoherent. THERE IS NO SUCH THING as "a possible digit
sequence on the list",
let alone "all possible digit sequences on the list". A sequence IS
EITHER ON THE LIST OR IT ISN'T,
FACTUALLY, NOT "possibly"! This list does NOT grow over time, or
APPROACH anything!
It IS ALWAYS, in full, THE WHOLE list of all and only the computable
reals.
It is NOT POSSIBLE, EVER, for ANY NON-computable real to be on this
list!


> What's your explanation for what happens if the list IS infinitely long?

You CANNOT SAY "if" here! The list FACTUALLY IS infinitely long!
ALL the time! Our explanation "if" that is the case IS THE SAME
explanation that
we have always been giving! What happens is that MOST reals ARE NOT
ON the list
because most reals are not computable (and neither is this list, for
that matter).
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Pulley Question
Next: The set of all SUBSETS that don't contain themself -> PARADISE