Comments by "eggynack" (@eggynack) on "TED-Ed"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You can always add people, as the video showed, but it's also possible to have each room filled with a person. Simply line up all of the people, and assign each person the number that matches their position in the line. Then, put person one in room one, person two in room two, and so on. Now, for any room you name, there exists a person in that room, meaning every room has a person in it. It's also possible to give each person infinite rooms, or to give each room infinite people, or leave infinite rooms empty, and any arbitrary lesser version of those.
Here's an interesting way to disprove your claim without using an example method. Let's assume that, when assigning people to rooms, there will always be rooms left. Now, let's try assigning rooms to people. The two are equivalent, with this situation able to be visualized as dropping some hotel room onto each person in turn (preferably without a floor, so they survive the experience). By your logic, it should be impossible to do this, meaning there are far more than enough people to fill every room.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andrea1854 That's not really a definition of dense I've seen. More common is to say something like, "The rationals are dense in the real numbers." This means that any two reals have a rational between them. Density is generally considered in this sense, with a subset considered dense in the set.
Your construction of density is somewhat troublesome. What if the interval is [0,∞]? In this case, there are infinite naturals, infinite evens, and infinite rationals. The same infinity each time as well. However, any smaller interval, say [2,3], will contain finite integers and infinite rationals. Moreover, we can identify some lower key versions of this situation. The odds are going to be more numerous than the primes over most intervals, but if we're working with something like [2,4], then there are more primes than odds, and the interval [2,9] has the same number of each. There's probably some way to formalize this idea of density, but it's pretty tricky to do.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I understand infinity quite well. From, y'know, studying mathematics a lot. It is entirely possible to fill an infinite hotel. All you need to do is generate a bijective mapping from the set of guests to the set of rooms.
Consider a more abstract example. You have two sets, the set of natural numbers, and the exact same set of natural numbers. Can you pair elements of the first set with elements of the second set such that no elements of either set are left over? Of course. Just pair each element in the first set with the same element in the second set.
In order to extend this situation to the hotel and guests, you need simply call the first set the guests and call the second set the hotel rooms. By this means, we have our mapping. Every guest has an exact room assignment, and conversely, every room has an exact guest assignment. Room one has guest one, room two has guest two, and so on.
This is how countability functions. If you have two countably infinite sets, then, by definition, one can be bijectively mapped onto the other. Both the hotel rooms and the guests, even when the guests are on infinite buses, are countable infinities.
Take note, this is not the only possible mapping. It is very much possible to generate a mapping where exactly one room is empty, or where infinite rooms are empty, or where any natural number of rooms is empty, or where every room has infinite guests, or where every guest has infinite rooms. I can provide any of these mappings for you, should you so desire. Their existence is far from theoretical.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@skyabyss7357 I mean, yeah, if you have a mapping to a set of rooms, and then there are more rooms, then the mapping will no longer work. As long as you're in the same cardinality of infinity though (like, if you add on some finite number of rooms, or add on as many rooms as there are natural numbers), then you can create a new mapping between the original quantity of guests and the new quantity of rooms.
Really, you're just asking the original question in reverse. By which I mean you're just asking the original question. You start with n rooms and n guests, you add a guest, and then the n+1 guests are still accommodated. This is the same as starting with n rooms and n guests, adding a room, and then having the n+1 rooms still wind up full, which is the scenario you propose, I think.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Countable infinities are infinities, and the infinity of a giant pile of discrete hotel rooms is a countable one. If the hotel had an uncountable infinity of hotel rooms somehow, then it could only be occupied by uncountably many people, but it could be occupied by uncountably many people. The hotel cannot be full in the sense that people can always be added, but the hotel absolutely can be full in the sense that every room has a person in it. As in, if you name a room then I can tell you both that it is full and who is in it.
You say there's no mathematical solution to filling the hotel, but there absolutely is one. As I said, you simply assign each person a natural number, and have them all simultaneously go to the room that matches the number they were assigned. There is no flaw in this construction, and no way that there would remain an unfilled room afterwards. If you think I'm mistaken, please either identify a flaw in the construction, or a room that is unfilled.
1
-
1
-
1
-
You don't have to finish one bus before starting the others. It isn't, as you note, a super effective strategy, and neither is taking one person from each bus in turn because then you'll never return to the first bus. Instead, you want to use something like the abacaba pattern. So, you label the buses alphabetically (moving onto aa and such when you hit z), and then remove the next passenger when you hit the bus with that label. For the order in which you select the buses, you can use abacabadabacabaeaba... In this fashion, you hit every bus infinitely many times, and across the same sort of time span as you would a single infinite bus.
Alternatively, you can use a system like what you use to prove that the natural numbers share a cardinality with the rationals. Label each bus with a number, and each passenger in each bus with a number. Then, set out the natural numbers along an x and y axis, generating a grid where the x axis defines a bus and the y axis a passenger. Finally, you draw a zig zag line that crosses over every number pair, and pick out bus/passenger pairs in an order defined by that line.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@asagk Of course I can quantify that assumption. Consider the natural numbers, say. Is there some absurd quantity of them that we just haven't reached? Let's assume there is, for the sake of argument, and assume this quantity is n. Thus, the set is 1, 2, 3, 4... n. Well, n+1 is also a natural number. Thus, there are at least n+1 natural numbers. This means there is a contradiction in our initial assumption that there is some finite quantity of natural numbers, meaning the set must be infinite.
As for countability, you're just misunderstanding what that term means. Simply put, if set is countable it means that we can construct some list such that, given any element in the set, we can reach that element by counting along the list. Returning to the natural numbers, I already laid out a basic list of them. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... Name any natural number and it will show up at some finite position on that list.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1