>>11486563

>we will set the limit to unlimited

gonna throw you a bone here. when you use infinity, you're just doing an x amount of finite steps, recognizing some kind of pattern (a function of consciousness, not mathematics), and then extrapolating an assumption of what continued work past x amount of finite steps might be """approaching""".

and in all that brain diarrhea of mind baloney are some hidden facets of unintelligible failed attempts at trickery, such as saying [math]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{9}{10^n} = 1 [/math] which is a complete fucking waste of the whole point of the equation being the sole example of an actually algorithmic way of properly producing [math]0.\overline{999}[/math] as it's own, distinct identity.

people like you would argue there is no such [math]0.\overline{000}1 [/math] number, yet at the at same time you would rely on the existence of this number to add with [math]0.\overline{999}[/math] to claim [math]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{9}{10^n} = 1 [/math] is a true expression.