Date: Nov 17, 2012 9:46 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 152
On Nov 17, 9:59 am, "LudovicoVan" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote:

> "William Hughes" <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:28bff553-f679-4e23-8932-a1fb42f1b364@c17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

>

> > Note that *set* limits have some important properties.

>

> > Given a sequence of sets {B_1,B_2,B_3,...}

> > then the set limit always exists (it

> > may be the empty set).

>

> > If we have

>

> > A = set limit {B_1,B_2,B_3....}

>

> > Then

>

> > A is a set

> > A cannot contain an element that is not contained

> > in any of the B's

>

> Williams going around, in circles:

>

> It was already mentioned that it is wrong to use that specific definition to

> solve the balls and vase problem.

>

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_superior_and_limit_inferior#Specia...>

>

The problem is the above applies to *any* definition of a *set* limit.