Abolish All Expectation

Mar 03, 2006 14:25

My boyfriend's best friend's girlfriend's granddad died on Wednesday ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 29

reaps March 3 2006, 06:50:21 UTC
I agree about personality, but I'm not sure about gender.

Reply


joel_j March 3 2006, 07:44:02 UTC
you're using infinite in a qualitative sense, so I don't think it really matters

Reply


ataxi March 3 2006, 08:17:11 UTC
There's an infinite number of types of infinity. Basically it turns out that the cardinality (size) of the set of subsets of a set cannot be the same as the cardinality of the set itself - there's a theorem called Cantor's Theorem that proves this (it has a really neat, intuitive proof).

So if you take the natural numbers N = {1,2,3,4,5,6,...} and their set of subsets P(N), also known as their "power set" where P(N) = {{1},{1,2},{3,59,23},{any other group of integers}}, roughly, then the size of N is definitely not the same as the size of P(N).

The size of P(N) is referred to as "aleph one" and the size of N is referred to as "aleph zero". If you consider the set of subsets of P(N), P(P(N)), you get "aleph two", and so forth, which is an infinite sequence of infinities of increasing infiniteness :-)

Reply

ataxi March 3 2006, 08:29:09 UTC
Oh yeah, from memory the countable infinity of the rationals is the same size as the countable infinity of the integers. Two sets are the same size if you can define a one-to-one mapping from one to the other. Any two countable items you just count them both, mapping first to first, second to second, etc., so all infinite countable sets are the same size.

Reply

incomplet_ March 8 2006, 00:35:02 UTC
I thought there were more rational numbers than there were integers.

Reply

ataxi March 8 2006, 00:48:04 UTC
Nope. You can count the rationals various ways, so there are the same number of them as there are natural numbers (and also integers).

Another interesting fact about numbers (well, I think it's interesting): for every real number, even irrational numbers such as pi, there is a countable sequence of rational numbers that approaches the real number arbitrarily closely. The real numbers are the analytical closure of the rationals. Another metaphor ripe for the picking :-)

Reply


volandum March 3 2006, 16:04:06 UTC
As ataxi said better, the size of the set of rationals is equivalent to that of the integers: map first the integers to the positive integers, then map those to the rational plane (just a Z*N lattice) starting at the origin and going into a spiral, omitting ones already covered and ones involving division by zero.

Ask if you want an explanation.

Reply


volandum March 3 2006, 16:05:51 UTC
It's not okay to use generic infinity, as we discussed while attempting to prove infinite knowable things and a lesser infinite knowledge.

Reply

incomplet_ March 8 2006, 00:30:46 UTC
Yeah but... Ask buggler, he knows where I'm coming from.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up