There is no Such a Thing as a Next Number

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There is no next number when it comes to numbers. If there is, then please tell me the next number to 0.

1

 

[Farid7]

1

What about 0.5?

 

[Tinker Grey]

There are infinite numbers in between them.

Which is irrelevant.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What about 0.5?

As a decimal number, yes, it does follow 0. But in the sequence given by natural whole numbers, 1 is next to 0. Just as 2 is next to 1, 3 is next to 2, then 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...
You can see where I'm going with this.

Your question wholly depends on which facet of mathematics you're following, as has been pointed out several times on this thread.

 

[Farid7]

As a decimal number, yes, it does follow 0. But in the sequence given by natural whole numbers, 1 is next to 0. Just as 2 is next to 1, 3 is next to 2, then 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...
You can see where I'm going with this.

Your question wholly depends on which facet of mathematics you're following, as has been pointed out several times on this thread.

Yes, true. It's like saying in a set of ABCs containing A, C, Z. C is next to A. It all depends on the type of ABC set being used.

Which is irrelevant.

It is to what I am saying.

 

[sjastro]

Zeno has never claimed the mathematical series does not converge. He only claimed that time is infinitely divisible.

You have lost the plot.
I have used "modern" mathematics to describe Zeno's paradox as a converging series involving limits.

The series

can be expressed as the limit

As can be seen from the graph S rapidly converges to a value approaching 1 even after only summing 10 terms.

 

[sjastro]

What about 0.5?

At the point of being repetitious this has explained to you in post#9.
Note that r is a real number which includes the following;
The restriction on r it must be a positive value.