• Kogasa@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m fully aware of the definitions. I didn’t say the definition of irrationals was wrong. I said the definition of the reals is wrong. The statement about quantum mechanics is so vague as to be meaningless.

      • Kogasa@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Google it? Axiomatic definition, dedekind cuts, cauchy sequences are the 3 typical ones and are provably equivalent.

      • wholookshere
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        A real number is the set of both rational and irrational numbers. Nothing about continuous anything.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It is exactly that though.

          Irrationel and rational numbers are both real.

          Quantum physics is limited to the quantum, hence the name.

          • wholookshere
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            Being continuous is not actually a requirement of being real.