I considered deleting the post, but this seems more cowardly than just admitting I was wrong. But TIL something!

  • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    You mean integers and real numbers between 0 and 1.

    All real numbers would start at 0, 0.1, 0.001, 0.0001… (a 1:1 match with the set between 0 and 1) all the way to 1, 1.1, 1.01… Etc.

    • lad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      No, ey mean real numbers and real numbers. Any interval of real numbers will have enough numbers to be equivalent to any other (infinite ones included)

    • lemmington_steele@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      no, there aren’t enough integers to map onto the interval (0,1).

      probably the most famous proof for this is Cantor’s diagonalisation argument. though as it usually shows how the cardinality of the naturals is small than this interval, you’ll also need to prove that the cardinality of the integers is the same as that of the naturals too (which is usually seen when you go about constructing the set of integers to begin with)