Cobalt's my favorite. Thinking of Mecca and Medina getting hit with ground-burst 20MT cobalt-salted warheads gives me warm fuzzies. It would send the proper message. Dubya should have done it before the rubble stopped bouncing on the morning of September 11th, 2001.
Discuss.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-23 23:52
sounds good to me
but do you have a big enough saltshaker?
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-24 1:21
I've got a 20 megaton saltshaker. I'm one mushroom cloud laying motherfucker, motherfucker.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-24 2:21
do it up then, you get mecca theys gonna be pissed
Name:
Troll llorT2005-01-24 14:48 (sage)
They want a jihad, so give them one.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-26 13:13
bbut i like pepper on my thermo-nuclear warheads
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-05 17:20
[4:25] Rational numbers as a countable infinity
1 Name: MathMajor : 2004-12-27 13:40
This past semester I took the first halves of Introduction to Analysis and Modern (Abstract) Algebra in which, naturally, we covered the basics of the cardinalities of infinities. I understand the concepts of what makes something countable verses uncountable. I simply have an intuitive problem with the fact that the rational numbers are countable. The other basics countable infinite sets (Integers, Evens, Odds, Natural Numbers, etc.) all sit well with me. For some reason, I just have a problem accepting that the Rationals are truly countable. I understand that a definition is not arguable, but it just does not feel right.
Part of my discontent lies in the fact that like the continueum, there is no smallest positive rational number. This is not true for the previously mentioned sets. I feel that the rationals are somehow set apart from this set. If I recall correctly, it was proven that "It cannot be proven nor disproven that there exists an infinite set whose cardinality is greater than the cardinality of the countable infinite sets and less than the cardinality of the continueum (the reals)."
If anyone knows where I may be able to find more information on this, or even has an answer to my dilemma, please let me know. Thanks!
-Will
The 5 newest replies are shown below.
Read this thread from the beginning
21 Name: Anonymous : 2008-01-04 18:15
FLOOD
22 Name: Anonymous : 2008-01-05 01:18
But how are they less than the infinite complex numbers.
23 Name: Anonymous : 2008-01-05 01:59
old thread is old
24 Name: Anonymous : 2008-01-05 10:56
They are both countable, just the rationals are not well order with the operator (<)
Imagine it this way, if we define every even integer n to have "size" 1/n, and then ordered to integers according to this definition we have this list:
....10, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9.......
there is no least, and no greatest number, very much resembling the rationals.
There are ways of ordering the rationals such that there is a "least member" just that the ordering isn't using the operator (<)
The fact that they have equal cardinality is obvious consider the injection f from Q to Z