News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by pash on Tuesday April 29, 2014 @05:43PM (#7670121)
As Alonzo Church and Alan Turing showed, the computable numbers [0] are countable too. The computable numbers include all the algebraic numbers and some transcendental numbers (including π and e), so the reals are uncountable "because" of those other transcendentals, the uncomputable numbers. Put differently, almost all reals are uncomputable.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_number

Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by NAFV_P on Tuesday April 29, 2014 @05:50PM (#7670158)
Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by GregBuchholz on Tuesday April 29, 2014 @07:20PM (#7670574)
Can't mention Omega without linking to:

Meta Math!

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0404335

Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by NAFV_P on Tuesday April 29, 2014 @07:44PM (#7670669)
Good book, I read it a few years ago.

His own proof that there are infinitely many primes is a good head spinner.

Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by Ind007 on Wednesday April 30, 2014 @04:24AM (#7672174)
Such a good read.Thanks for sharing this.
Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by JonnieCache on Wednesday April 30, 2014 @04:57AM (#7672229)
Check him out on youtube too, he's a fun speaker.
Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by jsbgir on Friday May 02, 2014 @04:31PM (#7687945)
This is really interesting. We could take it further and say that, given that some uncomputable reals have a finite definition (e.g. "the probability that a random algorithm halts"), there is a countable number of definable reals (by assigning a Godel number to each definition), so the uncountability of the reals is strictly due to indefinable numbers!
Re:Mathematicians trace source of Rogers-Ramanujan identitie... by surement on Thursday May 01, 2014 @04:01PM (#7682375)
I've only ever heard of one uncomputable number (Chaitin's constant), so this is rather mind-blowing.