"LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote in message news:junmgv$vrl$1@speranza.aioe.org... > "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote in message > news:junlnt$ugh$1@speranza.aioe.org... > >> Roughly speaking, the proof seems to amount to a "trick with indexes". > > "A n, ~ ( x_n e [ a_n, b_n ])" does not contradict the fact that "A n, a_n > (or, b_n) is an element of sequence x".
With the correction "A n, ~ ( x_n e ] a_n, b_n [)" I'll have to rethink this...
