Real number: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I am not yet sure how to define real numbers. Many irrational numbers (e.g. <math>\sqrt{2}</math> and <math>\pi</math>) are in fact valid concepts, but the standard definition of the reals involves infinite nonsense. | I am not yet sure how to define real numbers. Many irrational numbers (e.g. <math>\sqrt{2}</math> and <math>\pi</math>) are in fact valid concepts, but the standard definition of the reals involves infinite nonsense. | ||
The concept of real numbers is a ''concept'': it identifies things out in reality. In particular, it does not need to be "constructed" via some set-theoretic method like Dedekind cuts, nor do such constructions even make sense. That any real number can be approximated by fractions is obvious: a fraction is the outcome of directly measuring any quantity with a standard ruler. | |||
== Examples == | == Examples == |
Revision as of 01:17, 21 April 2024
I am not yet sure how to define real numbers. Many irrational numbers (e.g. and ) are in fact valid concepts, but the standard definition of the reals involves infinite nonsense.
The concept of real numbers is a concept: it identifies things out in reality. In particular, it does not need to be "constructed" via some set-theoretic method like Dedekind cuts, nor do such constructions even make sense. That any real number can be approximated by fractions is obvious: a fraction is the outcome of directly measuring any quantity with a standard ruler.
Examples
Any fraction.
Any algebraic number, like .
The number , where is its th digit in base 2, and where if is prime, and 0 otherwise.
The Euler-Mascheroni constant (where we don't actually know for sure whether or not it is rational)