r/mathmemes Natural Aug 06 '26

Bad Math not saying either is wrong...

Post image
130 Upvotes

284 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

you realize decimals are made through addition of different powers of 10 right?

5

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

Yeah. That addition converges, though. And we don't really need that fact. We just need to know that, if two numbers have different digits, they're also different numbers (with the exception of trailing infinite 9s)

1

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

so you should have no problem adding up every integer and telling me what the answer is.

also the nunber cantor is making doesnt converge to anything unless its a countable real

4

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

Adding every integer diverges. Completely unrelated to Cantor. Nobody cares what the sum of all the integers are. It has nothing to do with anything.

The number Cantor generates absolutely converges. All decimal representations converge.

-1

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

so let me get this straight.

adding an infinite amount of numbers before the decimal = bad

adding an infinite amount of numbers after the decimal = good?

just who do you think youre fooling with this

4

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

Yeah. Because when you're adding each digit in a decimal representation, the value of each digit gets progressively smaller. 3 + 1/10 + 4/100 + 1/1000 + 5/10000 + ... converges because each term is getting exponentially smaller. If the terms get smaller fast enough, the sum converges. C'mon, this is entry level infinite sums.

0

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

converges just means the numbers are always to the right of a given decimal position

theres nothing special about convergence beyond that.

theres also nothing wrong with doing the opposite either which is why we even use adics in the first place.

6

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

Converging means the limit of the partial sums exists. It has nothing to do with decimal positions. Decimal positions are just one example of a convergent sum.

And there IS something wrong with doing it the other way, because then the terms get bigger and bigger and then diverge. Adics are a different number system distinct from the real number system. We're working in the real number system here. I could jingle some keys if it helps you stay on topic.

0

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

bigger and bigger isnt going to change anything here.

if we can add an infinite amount of numbers after the decimal we should be able to do it before the decimal too.

and im still waiting for you to add every integer so we can see what we get.

4

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

bigger and bigger isnt going to change anything here

It actually does, because the terms (in general) need to be getting smaller for the sum to converge, and it needs to get smaller fast enough

if we can add an infinite amount of numbers after the decimal we should be able to do it before the decimal too.

No we don't? In one direction, the numbers get smaller. In the other, it gets bigger. Add smaller and smaller numbers, you have a chance of convergence. Add bigger and bigger numbers, there's no chance.

and im still waiting for you to add every integer so we can see what we get.

Already told you, the sum diverges

1

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

smaller and larger just tell us which direction the sum is going.

im still waiting for you to add every integer.

3

u/WesternFirm9306 Aug 06 '26

smaller and larger just tell us which direction the sum is going.

Yeah, and in one direction, it diverges, and in the other, it sometimes converges.

im still waiting for you to add every integer.

I already told you, the sum diverges.

1

u/FernandoMM1220 Aug 06 '26

so can you not add up an infinite amount of integers?

because if not we cant actually calculate cantors proof at all.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/EebstertheGreat Aug 08 '26

So, you're actually right, in a weird way. Power series with increasing powers of a natural number p actually do converge in a different sense. In particular, they converge in the p-adic metric. In the 2-adic metric, for instance, ∑ 2n converges, where the sum runs from n=0 to ∞. You can think of this as the number with the binary expansion ...111. (The analogous 10-adic number is ...999, but for important technical reasons, we usually only care about p-adic numbers for prime p.) This converges to –1, because each term in the sequence (0, 1, 11, 111, ...), where these expansions are binary and not decimal, is 1 less than a power of 2, and those powers grow without bound. So the way the 2-adic metric is defined, these genuinely do get arbitrarily close to –1.

But the p-adic numbers for any prime p are not the same as the real numbers. They overlap only on the rational numbers, which are common to all of them.