Re: abundance of irrationals!)

"*** T. Winter" <***.Winter@xxxxxx> wrote ...
mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (W. Mueckenheim) writes:

> SUM 1/2^k < 1 > k e N

Wrong when you use the standard definition of that infinite sum.
Because that is lim {n -> oo} sum {k <= n} 1/2^k.  But you refuse
to accept that definition, so you are using your own definition.
Are you finally willing to reveal how *you* define that infinite sum?

Since making the above claim, W.M. has steadfastly *refused* to state the definition he is using for SUM[k in N](1/2^k). Isn't it reasonable to suppose he *has* no definition, and does not understand what he himself has written?
.

Quantcast