[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 18 KB, 540x300, macaulay-culkin1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546677 No.5546677 [Reply] [Original]

The most important set of numbers in mathematics is:

>> No.5546680

[0,1]

>> No.5546687

>>5546680
Nah, I say [0,.5]. You can always just generate [0,1] by multiplying every member by two.

>> No.5546690

300K is the only number you need to know with a PhD in math

>> No.5546691
File: 133 KB, 991x675, 1359695815100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546691

universe set.

prove me wrong motherfuckers.

>> No.5546692

>>5546687
>multiplying every member by two
>[0, .5]
nope

>> No.5546695

>>5546692
fine, taking the sum of every member with itself.

>> No.5546698
File: 173 KB, 950x854, vlMjEgF.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546698

sets within sets

>> No.5546699

H or P

>> No.5546704

>>5546695
i dont think you get it

>> No.5546717

Define everything in Quarternions.

>> No.5546720
File: 711 KB, 1012x1088, 1361228951913.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546720

>>5546717
>not using sedenions

>> No.5546725

>>5546677

Natural numbers.

>> No.5546737

>>5546677
Op doesn't realize that the necessities of having a even one set of numbers precludes a rationally tuned concept of numeration as it interacts with the experienced world.

>> No.5546743
File: 275 KB, 800x600, mandelbrot-zoom.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546743

the mandelbrot set of numbers

>> No.5546764
File: 479 KB, 500x370, 1357620317930.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5546764

>>5546691
you are wrong because I am god.

>> No.5546765

pi

>> No.5546802

A single set of numbers is only interesting in relation with other sets of numbers.

>> No.5546823

>>5546802
>>5546737
Metaphysical-abstraction laser piercing through the incomprehensible hypothetical hierarchy between any set out of all the infinite possibilities.

>> No.5546830

>>5546823

But that would only work if the incomprehensible hypothetical hierarchy was imminently transcendent with respect to the Harsyanni dialectic.

>> No.5546831

important? probably naturals, ad hoc the integers.

interesting? reals

>> No.5546851

>>5546830
Only in regard to a clearly defined applied form of which numbers are a great and abstract example.

>> No.5546870

Probably too broad a question, most important set in number theory is the naturals (and thus its field of fractions); most important set in analysis is the reals (and thus its algebraic closure), algebra doesn't especially care.

>> No.5546891

>>5546743
I still don't get how the numbers in the set relate to that weird graph thing.

>> No.5546904

>>5546891
Well, you take a polynomial <span class="math"> f(z) = z^2 + c [/spoiler], with c a complex parameter, and continually iterate that function.

>> No.5547548

>>5546691
>most important set
>universe set
>set

>> No.5547554
File: 12 KB, 300x300, 2828934_300.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5547554

btw as a set of numbers i understand a set such that for all elements some property (beeing a number) holds

>> No.5547558

real numbers /thread

>> No.5547871

>>5546691
>universe set
Sure is undefined around here

>> No.5547891

>>5546677
The empty set.

>> No.5547902

>>5546743

You color the parts which are not in the set. The color depends on how fast the iteration diverges starting from the given number.

>> No.5547906

The set of all sets.

>> No.5547929

We can construct everything from the set of natural numbers, so:

<span class="math">
\mathbb{N}[/spoiler]

>> No.5547937

>>5547929
but the natural numbers can be constructed from the empty set.

>> No.5547947

>>5547937
Okay, emptyset it is.

>> No.5548052

>>5547937
Nope.
Otherwise, why would we need the axiom of infinity?

>> No.5548086

Definitely the hyperradicals.

>> No.5548173

set of imaginary numbers