tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post8542976926943689249..comments2024-07-03T02:33:39.550-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: A Test of Technical Trading RulesEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-92226908775452753112008-08-08T17:59:00.000-05:002008-08-08T17:59:00.000-05:00Why I'm not a mathematician. Real, rational, what...Why I'm not a mathematician. Real, rational, whatever!Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-957871661509914242008-08-08T14:59:00.000-05:002008-08-08T14:59:00.000-05:00No, the number of rationals is still Aleph-0. Ther...No, the number of rationals is still Aleph-0. There are just as many natural numbers as there are integers as there are rationals, because each set can be placed in a one-to-one correspondence with the others; see e.g. http://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/30001.3-4.shtmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com