Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus <DavidMarcus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:29:22 -0500
Andy Smith wrote:
I don't know about the cos(m! pi x) term, but (bearing in mind I don't
have a pilot's licence) I would say that:
Lim n->oo {|x|^n} is definitely not 0 for |x|<1, 1 for |x|=1.
At a first glance one is tempted to say, well, at any n, let x >=
1-1/(2n). Then for any n, x^n >1/2 (terms of (1-y)^n are monotonic
decreasing for y<1 and alternating in sign), so
it cannot be true that the lim n->oo of |x|^n = 0 for all |x| <=x<1
You have demonstrated what people on sci.math refer to as dyslexia. You
have switched the order of the operations. As far as the limit is
concerned, x is a fixed number. Let's try x = 1/2. The question is what
is the value of
lim n->oo (1/2)^n
? To be more precise, saying
lim n->oo |x|^n = 0, for |x| < 1
is different from saying
lim n->oo sup_{|x|<1} |x|^n.
"sup" is like max, but is used when the maximum isn't obtained.
--
David Marcus
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- References:
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Michael Press
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: David Marcus
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Michael Press
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- From: Andy Smith
- Re: Cantor Confusion
- Prev by Date: Re: Fast Fourier Filtering?
- Next by Date: Re: Axiom of Pairing, Scheme of Replacement from others
- Previous by thread: Re: Cantor Confusion
- Next by thread: Re: Cantor Confusion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|