I’m imagining a set of big naturals
imagine
Submitted 3 hours ago by UnGlasierteGurke@feddit.org to [deleted]
https://feddit.org/pictrs/image/1ce0577d-e3e2-41d1-984a-f98c6961a984.webp
Comments
ivanafterall@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
I just imagined it? Now what?
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
Well now you just triggered a false vacuum decay on the far side of the galaxy. Way to go.
MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Now wrote a paper showing that your set is neither countably nor uncountably infinite and become the most famous mathematician I’ve replied to today
ivanafterall@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
No, it’s private. You have no right to the things I imagine and that wasn’t the deal!
Monster96@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 hours ago
The limit is trying to be 100% unique and novel.
Like, try to imagine a creature that has 0 inspiration from everything you know about real life.
wagesj45@fedia.io 1 hour ago
Sounds like you're asking the human brain to fire in a pattern it's not even wired for. Random noise in the web, or even definitionally impossible as "totally alien" might imply a configuration of neurons opposite of what we have. I feel like I'm having a hard time describing my thought here.
thoughtfuldragon@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 hour ago
If there was one, would that imply cardinality might be continuous rather than discrete?
gigastasio@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
I imagined a bunny wearing a kimono singing Bring Me the Horizon covers. ❤️
reseller_pledge609@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 hours ago
That actually sounds awesome. I’d pay to go to that show.
TriangleSpecialist@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Georg Cantor in shambles.
Dadifer@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Another way of stating the difference between natural vs. real sets is that you can’t count every real number. What’s in between? A set where you can count some significant portion?
FishFace@piefed.social 2 hours ago
Are you saying that there’s nothing in between? Prove it, and turn modern mathematics inside out!
mEEGal@lemmy.world 1 hour ago
Correct me if.I’m wrong but the Continuum Hypothesis was proven undecidable. So we can chose to add CH (false or true, whichever we like) to ZFC without changing anything meaningful about ZFC.
But then, if we chose it to be true, could we construct such a set ?
BarbedDentalFloss@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 minutes ago
There are more rational numbers than natural numbers. There are more real numbers than rational numbers.
Checkmate meme.