[math]F:\mathbb{Q} \to \mathbb{Q}[/math], [math]x \mapsto 2x[/math]

a line of slope 2 going through the origin

>>8813868

are you a brainlet?

>>8813869
are you?

>>8813872

I asked for a graph, and I get the implication that what you said included the "reals".

>>8813874
rationals are dense in the reals so whatever resolution you draw the graph in will make it look a line

>>8813881

but there will exist discontinuities

>>8813885
set theoretically sure since Q isnt complete, but there's enough Q-points that any 'gap' in the line you draw will actually have a Q-point you can put a dot on

>>8813885
when you draw a line, what makes you think it looks like R more than it looks like Q? your function is just a line

Retarded thread
OP is a faggot
Sage

>>8813886
>>8813887

This is hand wavy drivel at best. I demand rigour.

>>8813891

Brainlet.

>>8813897
what the fuck is hand wavy here you retarded fucking moron? you're not asking a real question

>what does math look like

it probably looks like shit to you because you're so far up your own ass. kill yourself fucking imbecile baboon

File: gorilla9.jpg (207KB, 605x763px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 605x763px

>>8813899

>you're not asking a real question
>"What does it look like on a graph?"

dumb brainlet

>>8813897
>This is hand wavy drivel at best. I demand rigour.
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rationals_are_Everywhere_Dense_in_Reals

File: a.png (7KB, 498x283px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 498x283px

>>8813915
idiot

>>8813917

[math]x \in \mathbb{R}[/math]

can't start a proof on a false premise.

>>8813885
>>8813874
>>8813869
How do you think your calculator plots it? Or any computer? They use exclusively rational numbers, you dumb brainlet.

>>8813929

Of course you can. If all of the other steps in the proof are valid, yet end in a contradiciton, then what is left is to conclude that the premise had indeed been false all along, and so to say that its negation is true. This is such a common technique of proof that it is scandalous that you do not seem to have appreciated that it is both commonly used and logically valid.