Quantcast

Got Homework?

Connect with other students for help. It's a free community.

  • across
    MIT Grad Student
    Online now
  • laura*
    Helped 1,000 students
    Online now
  • Hero
    College Math Guru
    Online now

Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

jerwyn_gayo

which group of numbers are more numerous? A. rational B. irrational

  • one year ago
  • one year ago

  • This Question is Closed
  1. anusha.p
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081129115431AAzAtYD

    • one year ago
  2. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    a theoretical question, i just want your insights!

    • one year ago
  3. alexwee123
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    i would go w/ irrational cuz they are uncountably infinte

    • one year ago
  4. alexwee123
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    here http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1259484.

    • one year ago
  5. Romero
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    irrational right?

    • one year ago
  6. Study23
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Irrational. There are an infinite amount. For an example, consider 1.24 and 1.25 (completely random). There's 1.245 in between, amnd 1.246. Between those, there's 1.2455 and 1.2456. This goes on for \(\ \Huge \infty !\)

    • one year ago
  7. Romero
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    yeah because between 1 and 2 there can be an infinite

    • one year ago
  8. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    yeah, perhaps you're right! basing on grammar and language rule,. but i think in other sense, rational are more in number than irrational..

    • one year ago
  9. Romero
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    infinity times infinity is more than infinity

    • one year ago
  10. Study23
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    I think both are numerous. There's an infinite amount of rational numbers, and an infinite amount of irrational numbers. Both go \(\ \huge \rightarrow \infty . \)

    • one year ago
  11. Study23
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    \(\ \Huge \pm\infty that is \).

    • one year ago
  12. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    The answer is the irrational numbers. For some better understanding of why, you need to understand Cantor's work in the countability of infinite sets. The rationals are countably infinite; the irrationals are uncountably infinite.

    • one year ago
  13. Romero
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    Oh @nbouscal hit the spot!!

    • one year ago
  14. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Brief coverage of the notion of countability: A set is countably infinite if it can be put into a bijection with the natural numbers. If it cannot, then it is uncountably infinite. Cantor's proof of the uncountability of the reals is known as his diagonal argument, and is a very fun proof. There are a lot of resources available on the web for learning about and understanding this proof.

    • one year ago
  15. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    our professor said, the answer is irrational.. but i hate to accept his, idea same as yours, by saying the difference in definition- "countable and uncountable".

    • one year ago
  16. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Why do you hate to accept it? Have you seen and understood Cantor's diagonal argument? It is quite intuitive once you understand it.

    • one year ago
  17. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    may i have the website of it?

    • one year ago
  18. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Here is a thread here on OS that may help you: http://openstudy.com/updates/4fc25b57e4b0964abc83b70b Here is Wikipedia on Cantor's diagonal argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor%27s_diagonal_argument Here is Professor Francis Su of Harvey Mudd giving a lecture on Countable and Uncountable Sets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mciBPGCvpBk

    • one year ago
  19. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Uncountable is not at all synonymous to nonexistent, it is simply saying that you can't count them, for a specific definition of counting (bijection to the naturals).

    • one year ago
  20. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    i'm not yet convinced. but, anyway, thanks for the ideas.

    • one year ago
  21. nbouscal
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    If you are not yet convinced then you simply have not yet understood the argument :)

    • one year ago
  22. jerwyn_gayo
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 0

    i haven't read it yet! :-)

    • one year ago
    • Attachments:

See more questions >>>

Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.

spraguer (Moderator)
5 → View Detailed Profile

is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...

23

  • Teamwork 19 Teammate
  • Problem Solving 19 Hero
  • You have blocked this person.
  • ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...

Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.

This is the testimonial you wrote.
You haven't written a testimonial for Owlfred.