In article <9e3efe24-bbc4-4664-88c0-0cfec7599669@w7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 23 Nov., 18:30, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On the contrary, the fact that the analytic *limit* > > > > cannot be described in terms of digits is > > > > the point.- > > > > > No, that is not a point. The analytic limit can be calculated. > > Yes > > > Analysis infers from the limit the number of required digits, > > > > Piffle.- > Look here: Limit[n-->oo] SUM[k=0 to n] a_k*10^k = oo. > The set { a_k | k in |N } has cardinality aleph_0, according to > analysis, for every infinite sequence with limit oo.
Then WM must be claiming that oo can be expressed as a sequence of digits.
Which I will not believe until I see it done, and done WITHOUT abbreviation or ellipsis. --
