Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Sequence limit
Replies: 72   Last Post: Nov 26, 2013 12:07 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Bart Goddard Posts: 1,706 Registered: 12/6/04
Re: Sequence limit
Posted: Oct 4, 2013 8:36 PM

>> > you're an "Instructor."
>
> I am sorry if my being instructor disturbs you.

"Disturbs?" My classes are full of students who've
been misled by incompetent "instructors" who say things
like "Anything to the zero power is 1", which those
kids bring to university and use to make my job 10
times harder.

>However, if error/s in
> _my solution_ disturb you, show me at which one of the 4 steps you

You're going to help me? Calculus is a freshman class
and one topic (arguably the MAIN topic) of calculus is
dealing with indeterminate forms. Not only do you not
know how to deal with them, you didn't even recognize
one at hand. Further, you going to let the exponent of the
expression go to zero, while somehow holding the rest
of the expression back?

Worse, you don't know enough trig to realize that
sin(x) is zero infinitely often, which means that
sin(x)^(1/x) is zero infinitely often. So not only
do you not know calculus, you don't even know trig.
If you have a high school diploma, you shouldn't.
And most certainly you shouldn't be an "instructor"
of math/physics when you don't know any math or
physics.

> If you plot a simple graph of y= |sin x|^(1/x), you won't be able to
> say that "the value of |sin x|^(1/x) is zero infinitely often".

See those little spikes in your graph? Zoom in on them.
The more you zoom in, the closer they are to zero. Maybe
instead of a "simple" graph, you could have tried
using calculus techniques to create the graph and
find the coordinates of the cusps...?

>> So the that limit can't be 1.
>
> This is your conclusion based on wrong assumption that "the value of
> |sin x|^(1/x) is zero infinitely often". I don't see any logic in it.

This is my correct concuclusion based on logic. It was the
logic I gave in the previous post. And above.

So why is it that the most condescending people are
always the most clueless, oblivious, least trained
and just plain stupid? Why do they
usually make those people into deans?

Date Subject Author
10/3/13 Bart Goddard
10/3/13 Karl-Olav Nyberg
10/3/13 quasi
10/3/13 quasi
10/3/13 Karl-Olav Nyberg
10/3/13 quasi
10/4/13 Roland Franzius
10/4/13 quasi
10/5/13 Roland Franzius
10/5/13 quasi
10/26/13 Roland Franzius
10/26/13 karl
10/26/13 Roland Franzius
10/26/13 gnasher729
10/27/13 karl
10/3/13 quasi
10/4/13 Leon Aigret
10/4/13 William Elliot
10/4/13 quasi
10/4/13 William Elliot
10/4/13 quasi
10/4/13 David C. Ullrich
10/4/13 Robin Chapman
10/5/13 Bart Goddard
10/4/13 Bart Goddard
10/4/13 Peter Percival
10/5/13 Virgil
10/4/13 Bart Goddard
10/6/13 David Bernier
10/6/13 Virgil
10/6/13 Bart Goddard
10/7/13 Mohan Pawar
10/7/13 Bart Goddard
10/7/13 gnasher729
10/7/13 Richard Tobin
10/7/13 Robin Chapman
10/7/13 Michael F. Stemper
10/7/13 Michael F. Stemper
10/7/13 David Bernier
10/7/13 fom
10/8/13 Virgil
10/8/13 fom
10/8/13 Virgil
10/8/13 fom
10/4/13 fom
10/4/13 quasi
10/4/13 quasi
10/9/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
10/10/13 Bart Goddard
11/5/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
11/6/13 Bart Goddard
11/11/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
11/12/13 Bart Goddard
11/15/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
11/15/13 Bart Goddard
11/6/13 Timothy Murphy
11/8/13 Bart Goddard
11/8/13 Paul
11/8/13 Bart Goddard
11/9/13 Paul
11/9/13 quasi
11/9/13 quasi
11/9/13 quasi
11/13/13 Timothy Murphy
11/13/13 quasi
11/14/13 Timothy Murphy
11/14/13 Virgil
11/14/13 Roland Franzius
11/26/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
11/9/13 Roland Franzius
11/9/13 Paul