|
|
In article <45476d37$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tony Orlow <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> David R Tribble wrote:
> > Virgil wrote:
> >>> Are the properties of "Finlayson Numbers" known to anyone except
> >>> Ross himself?
> >
> > Tony Orlow wrote:
> >> Uh, yeah, I think I understand what his numbers are. Perhaps you've seen
> >> our recent exchange on the matter? They are discrete infinitesimals such
> >> that the sequence of them within the unit interval maps to the naturals
> >> or integers on the real line. Is that about right, Ross?
> >
> > Only a countable infinity of them? Then the number of infinitesimals
> > in [0,1] is exactly the same as the reciprocals 1/n for every natural
> > n>0, right? But there are c reals in [0,1], so are there more reals
> > than infinitesimals?
> >
>
> I think Ross has to answer that one. In my book, the naturals are really
> *N, the hypernaturals, and so there are an uncountably, actually
> infinite, number of them, and then EF works for me as a special case of IFR.
TO's book only exists in TO's twilight zone.
|
|