Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:44:02 -0600
In article <1184096471.659205.71380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
WM <mueckenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9 Jul., 21:56, Virgil <vir...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Then according to WM, every derivative must always equal 1 at all
points, and f(x) = |x| must have a derivative at x = 0, and lots more.
That's nonsense.
Maybe, but it is WM's nonsense, not mine, to argue that functions must
continuous at points outside their domains.
Continuous functions must be continuous.
No function is continuous at any point outside its domain of definition,
however continuous it may be within that domain.
The derivative of |x| is not
continuous but -1 for negative x and +1 for positive x. In contrast
sinx/x is continuous. Your example fails.
The expression sin(x)/x is not even defined for x = 0, so that WM is
claiming that it has a value when it does not have a value.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- References:
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: *** T. Winter
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: Virgil
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- From: WM
- Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Prev by Date: Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Next by Date: Re: Elementary proof without structure theorem for abelian groups?
- Previous by thread: Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Next by thread: Re: ** says: Definition: sum{i in N} i = 0
- Index(es):