In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 18 Jul., 21:53, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > > In article > > > The Lim-Sup and Lim-Inf definitions depend only on the existence of a > > sequence of sets, which is what the Vase problem provides. > > Simultaneously, also the approximations of the continiued fraction > ((((((10^0)/10)+10^1)/10)+10^2)/10)+... > happen to provide the same sequence of sets.
Nonsense! None of those approximations are sets at all, but merely rational numbers. > > Does set theory provide the value of the continued fraction?
No more than continued fractions provide set limits.
Only someone as ditzy as WM would conflate those two types of sequences. --