this doesn't make sense to me, smart people? (infinity)

[Savy]

What happens when you divide each of those terms by infinity?

Remember when I said that infinity isn't a number it was a concept and you didn't really seem to take my post seriously.

Well, that question is similar to asking what happens when we divide 8 by potato.

Also I do believe the real and natural number sets have cardinality, its just complicated to demonstrate.

Eg. You give me 0.1, I give you 1, you give me 0.2, u give you 2. Now you yet to get clever and give me 0.15, I give you 3. You give me 0.15789, I give you 4. You can go on to infinity, interestingly enough, so can I.

That's wrong, and someone has already posted the logic behind why it is wrong.

The reason in easier logic (but by no means anywhere near a proof, as I am just looking at positive real numbers) is that the natural numbers are countable.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.....

Whereas to count the real numbers no matter what number you pick we get more, so much so that they aren't countable.

0.1, 0.2, ohh wait we can also have 0.15 and loads of others numbers, let's try 0.01.

0.01, 0.02, ohh wait we can also have 0.015 and loads of other numbers, let's try 0.001

0.001, 0.002, ohh wait ...

As the real numbers are uncountable, that makes them a bigger set. Therefore there is no amount of natural numbers we can use to match up them all, as we could always find a real number in between ANY two real numbers, whereas we can not find a natural number in between ANY two real numbers because natural numbers next to each other, i.e. 1&2, 8&9, 214124&214125 don't have another natural number between them.

[rong]

As the real numbers are uncountable, that makes them a bigger set. Therefore there is no amount of natural numbers we can use to match up them all, as we could always find a real number in between ANY two real numbers, whereas we can not find a natural number in between ANY two real numbers because natural numbers next to each other, i.e. 1&2, 8&9, 214124&214125 don't have another natural number between them.

The bold part, no amount of natural numbers is correct, but an infinite amount, well now we can.

[surviva316]

Remember when I said that infinity isn't a number it was a concept and you didn't really seem to take my post seriously.

Well, that question is similar to asking what happens when we divide 8 by potato.

I wasn't not taking it seriously; I was agreeing. The passage you quoted when you said "infinity isn't a number, it's a concept" said almost the exact same thing except in different words.

The passage you quoted was me using a hypothetical to disprove that infinites are equivalent. I said later in the post that the whole exercise was irrelevant and impossible. The point was that given rong's premise (that infinites are an amount, all of which are equivalent to each other), then any amount that is divided by an equivalent is 1, which would disprove rong's own point.

Again, though, later in the post I went on to say that the premise is wrong anyway and all of the terms couldn't be compared because infinity isn't a number.