Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 15:06:13 UTC No. 16157787

>>16157777
>imagine getting filtered by the first week of your first math class
Time to drop out, OP. Math isn't for you.

Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 15:23:26 UTC No. 16157807

>>16157787
Time to kill yourself with a rusty knife faggot

Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 15:27:24 UTC No. 16157810

>>16157807
Thanks for proving my point, you violent monkey. You have neither the intelligence nor the maturity to study math. Go back to your "hood" where you belong.

Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 15:30:48 UTC No. 16157811

>>16157777
>How can a number be a subset?
I think you mean the oart where he talks about "the cut defining a real number".
He doesnt say that a real number is a cut or a set, but that basically the real number is "defined" by the cut. Like theres a 1 to 1 relation, and to give a cut is to give a real number, so a cut can be used to identify a real number.
It sounds pretty fucking stupid, just saying that no one is saying that some real number=a set of rational numbers.
As to a set not having a largest element, its just a cunty way of saying its infinite.
I see nothing clever or useful about these definitions.

Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 15:35:39 UTC No. 16157813

>>16157811
Yeah, I'm getting it now having googled around. I think it was weird grammar plus the idea of "no largest element" that threw me. Which became a lot clearer when I remembered there's no largest prime and prime numbers can be a set. Appreciate the constructive advice.

>>16157810
I will do math in the hood in Central Asia and there's nothing you can do about it you scared White cunt.