Date: Oct 3, 2017 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: It is a very bad idea and nothing less than stupid to define 1/3<br> = 0.333...

On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 2:50:45 PM UTC-6, John Gabriel wrote:

> I just realised that when I first posted this comment, I had not included the
> link to my now world famous article:


And in that article, Euler did indeed use oversimpllified language, by talking
about continuing the sum of the series to infinity, so that the error becomes

Instead of the proper rigorous language, where the error can be made smaller
than any finite value by continuing the sum of the series to a large enough, but
finite number of terms.

But, although you correctly caught a slip of Euler's tongue, or, rather, pen,
that still has exactly zero relevance to the validity of the proper rigorous

John Savard