In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, WM <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 28 Nov., 14:56, mstem...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) > wrote: > > In article > > <f6cde06f-8269-4768-a73e-9219bd020...@k6g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>, WM > > <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> writes: > > > > >Matheology =A7 162 > > > > >About limits of real sequences. > > > > >The limit of an infinite sequence (a_k) of real numbers a_k is > > >determined solely by the finite terms of the sequence.
Only if those terms establish a pattern which is presumed to apply to all terms of the sequence. Absence of any such presumable pattern prohibits any presumption of re a limiting value. > >
> > Anyhow: Analysis and set theory supply different limits, namely a > limit larger than 1 and a limit less than 1.
Because they are measuring different things! E.g., the numerical value of a limit and the number of nonzero digits in that limit need not be equal. --