```Date: Dec 27, 2012 6:24 PM
Author: kirby urner
Subject: Re: A Point on Understanding

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Robert Hansen <bob@rsccore.com> wrote:>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 6:02 PM, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:>> n * (360 - v) = 720>>> Fine, I was trying to help you see more easily, just substitute that into> what I said...>> The limit(n) * limit(360 - v) as n->infinity and v->360 IS NOT THE SAME AS> limit(n * (360 - v)) as n->infinity and v->360 BECAUSE limit (n) as> n->infinity DOES NOT EXIST.>> Bob HansenI don't think your straw man argument helps my students understand howadding the fact of curvature changes the answer.The limit (360 - v) really could be 0 if perfect flatness is allowed,but when we add the constraint of curvature, then even thougheverything locally seems to stay the same -- given the epsilon / deltatreatment alone (Debater A) -- the added fact of curvature is newinformation and tells us that as n --> infinity, there's a 720involved (Debater B).We didn't have that before.  Curvature subtracts fractions of a degreefrom each vertex.  That's knowledge of a global constraint that evadesdetection under the microscope.Kirby
```