rare MEdZ-related post
i’ve just edited in a subscript-backslash-zero
to the top line…
which now reads …
to repair an *earlier* repair, done sloppily.
somewhere along the line i tacked on the “—{(0,0)}”
*without* adjusting the “zee-cross-zee” ().
a beginner-like blunder, i confess. onward! *more* mistakes!
(just get down in the dirt and *calculate*, by golly.)
anyhow, owners of Math Ed Zine #0.4— by name—
should please to adjust the appropriate page in their issues.
which, being interpreted, means that
the set of *rational numbers* (Q) can be
represented as the collection of *lines through
the origin* (in the usual (x,y)-plane),
having *rational slope*. The slope condition,
for a given line, is equivalent to the condition
that there be an *integer* pair lying on the line
(nonzero; it gets to be something of a pain…).
the algebraic process whereby S…
nonzero-integer-pairs…
“maps onto” Q
is called “factoring by a relation”.
the relation in this case is called “tilde” (~).
tilde is defined by
” (x_1, y_1) ~ (x_2, y_2)
MEANS THE SAME THING AS
x_1 * y_2 = x_2 * y_1″
(“cross-multiplication” is in effect;
tilde is the relation we want “because”
when ).
oh heck. there’s that infinite-sloped line.
belongs to S/~, too. OK. modify the .
let’s call it , say. okay.
that’s it.
.


April 10, 2011 at 5:37 pm
we shoulda just had x nonzero
and got it over with…
[
x, not y, because we're using "slopes"
of the form "(y_2 - y_1)/(x_2 - x_1)".
]
April 17, 2011 at 10:51 pm
weirder and weirder. i recently found an
…
issue of the zine wherein i’d *made* the
correction to
but *without* cutting “zero” out
of zee-cross-zee.
anyhow any and all future printings
will be correcter & very likely prettier
than any’ve been so far.