On 10 Jul., 22:05, Gus Gassmann <horand.gassm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 10, 4:54 pm, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In article > > <0b933e1d-5a13-4b5b-923d-6aa57e46d...@j9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, > > > WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > On 10 Jul., 18:51, Gus Gassmann <horand.gassm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Furthermore, your > > > > insulting tone fools nobody into thinking that you have a clue of what > > > > you are talking about. It`s rather the contrary, actually. > > > > Same with you. Answer the mathematical side of the problem, pleeze, if > > > you can: > > > > 01 > > > 0.1 > > > 010.1 > > > 01.01 > > > 0101.01 > > > 010.101 > > > ... > > > > Enough to see how it continues? > > > Not every sequence has a limit, so until WM can show us that his > > "sequence" is well defined and has an unambiguous limit, it is a total > > irrelevancy. > > Ah right. This is another variant. As I wrote in my other post, it is > not too far-fetched to claim that this sequence has a limit, and that > that limit is "infinity".
Really? It is not too far-fetched???
> It is another thing entirely to relate that > back to the balls in urn problem, because he has very carefully > obliterated the connection,
> and because he does not get that lim > card(M_n) does not have to equal card lim(M_n).
In mathematics we have limcard(M_n) = oo = cardlim(M_n). The cardinal of digits of the limit number is infinite, precisely then when the number defined by the limit of the cardinal of digits is infinite.
> I do feel sorry for > his poor students, but his rector and, apparently, the state of > Bavaria, is quite happy to let him continue.-
They know: In mathematics of increasing numbers lim card n = card lim n.