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.