Science Memes

11243 readers

3856 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

[email protected]

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

945

hmmmm (mander.xyz)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

199 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh okay.

If there are infinite numbers, then there's 3 in there somewhere.

No, this is not true. Just because you have infinitely many numbers in some collection, doesn't mean one of the numbers in your collection has to be 3.

Look at the number line. There are infinitely many numbers on the number line between 1 and 2. For example 1+1/2, 1+1/4, 1+1/8, ... are in there (among many others). But all of the numbers between 1 and 2 are strictly smaller than 3, so none of them can be 3.

Alternatively, there are infinitely many numbers strictly smaller than 3, none of which are 3 either.

If 3 is not there then it's not infinite.

Well consider the set of numbers 3+1, 3+2, 3+3, 3+4, ... (the set of integer numbers strictly larger than 3). This set of numbers is also infinite and does not contain 3. So a set being infinite doesn't imply it must contain the number 3.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

Ah, thank you for the explanation. That makes sense now.