• sniggleboots
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Ah I see why they worded it the way they did. I would argue that’s just the limitation of the illustration, considering the text words the premise correctly, but fair!

    • Fleur_@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      One person for every decimal isn’t possible even with infinite people. That is the point I’m making.

      • sniggleboots
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Neither is assigning a person to every natural number, so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make?

        • Fleur_@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          But you actually can assign a unique person to every number, you just need an infinite number of people. You literally mathematically can’t do that for uncountable infinities.

          • saimen@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Really? Isn’t the point that when you assign a natural number to every real number you can always generate a “new” real number you haven’t “counted” yet, meaning the set of real numbers is larger which is also is the point of the image.

            • Fleur_@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              No, thats not what I mean and that’s not the case. Even though there are infinite natural numbers, you can count them all. More accurately you can define a process that eventually will count them all. This is entirely different from decimal numbers which there is no process you can define that will exhaust all decimals. In this way the decimals are uncountable.

              When talking about infinities this makes the infinity that contains all decimals larger than the infinity that contains only whole numbers.

              My disagreement with the meme is that assigning an individual to each decimal is essentially a process of counting and this is a fundamental contradiction. As such the comparison to the set of natural numbers is nonsensical and the implication that there are less people assigned to the smaller infinity is incoherent.