Almost All" Numbers in [0,1] are Satanic

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter EL
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of "satanic" numbers, defined as numbers in the interval [0,1] whose decimal expansion contains the sequence 666. It is established that almost all numbers in [0,1] are satanic, as the Lebesgue measure of the set of non-satanic numbers is 0. The probability of randomly selecting a non-satanic number approaches zero due to the frequency of the sequence 666 occurring in decimal expansions. The proof relies on measure theory, specifically the properties of countable and uncountable sets.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lebesgue measure and its properties
  • Familiarity with measure theory concepts
  • Knowledge of decimal expansions and their implications in real analysis
  • Basic understanding of countable versus uncountable sets
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Lebesgue measure in-depth, focusing on its application in real analysis
  • Explore the implications of countability in measure theory
  • Learn about the properties of decimal expansions and their significance in mathematics
  • Investigate other examples of sets with measure zero in different contexts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of real analysis, and anyone interested in measure theory and its applications in understanding properties of numbers.

EL
Science Advisor
Messages
557
Reaction score
0
Could someone please help me with this problem which I have suffered many hours in front of? I never came to any solution which totally satisfied me, and I'm guessing I'm on the wrong track...

A number x in the interval [0,1] is called "satanic" if the decimal expansion of x contains somewhere the sequence 666.
Show that "almost all" numbers in [0,1] are satanic, i.e., that m([0,1]\S)=0 where S is the set of satanic numbers, and m is the Lebesgue measure.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let us assume [0,1]\S is measurable (I can't see why it shouldn't be), its measure is then the probability that a number I pick at random from [0,1] doesn't contain 666 at any point in its expansion. But that probability is zero, as the 666 occurs roughly once in every 1000 blocks of three digits, so the probability it doesn't occur in the first n*1000 places is 999/1000)^n which tends to zero as n tends to infinity.
 


First of all, I want to acknowledge the frustration and difficulty you have faced in trying to solve this problem. It can be disheartening when we spend hours trying to find a solution and still feel like we are on the wrong track. But don't give up, as it is often through perseverance and seeking help that we can eventually find a satisfying solution.

Now, let's address the issue at hand. The statement that "almost all" numbers in [0,1] are satanic can be proven using the concept of measure theory. In this context, the term "almost all" means that the set of numbers in [0,1] that are not satanic has a measure of 0. In other words, the set of satanic numbers is so small compared to the whole interval [0,1] that it can be considered negligible.

To prove this, we first need to define the Lebesgue measure, denoted by m, which is a mathematical tool used to measure the size of sets in a given space. In this case, the space is [0,1] and the set we are interested in is S, the set of satanic numbers. The Lebesgue measure of a set is defined as the length, area, or volume of the set, depending on the dimension of the space.

Now, we can use the definition of the Lebesgue measure to show that the set of satanic numbers has a measure of 0 in [0,1]. Since the decimal expansion of a number can be infinite, we can think of the numbers in [0,1] as points on a number line, with each point representing a unique decimal expansion.

Given that the decimal expansion of a satanic number contains the sequence 666 somewhere, we can conclude that the set of satanic numbers is countable. This means that we can list all the satanic numbers in a sequence, such as 0.666, 0.0666, 0.00666, and so on. Since the set is countable, it has a measure of 0, according to the definition of the Lebesgue measure.

On the other hand, the set of non-satanic numbers in [0,1] is uncountable, which means we cannot list all the numbers in a sequence. Therefore, the set of non-satanic numbers has a measure of 1, according to the Lebesgue measure. Since
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K