/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11108359
>thus we must use a limit arrow to warn everyone we are making retarded leaps of faith.
Good idea. I suggest we write something like [math]\lim_{x \to \infty}[/math] to let people know that we're looking at the limit as x goes to infinity.

>>11108362
sure, but saying the limit of 1/x (1->inf) "=" 0 is factually wrong. its not equal to 0 even "at" infinity. it just doesn't work like that. the strongest relation you can make is to say there is some margin which separates it from zero by an ever decreasing amount, never " it literally IS zero"

>>11108362
so ill show you the correct wording:

epsilon > lim 1/x, x: 1 -> inf > 0

so why is this a problem? take the sum of 1/x for all positive x. the logic of normal notation creates the impression that at some point the function will terminate to zero and this so will its cumulative. this is obviously not the case as this cumulative function is divergent.
if you make it clear that limits like this always have a positive value it then becomes intuitive that the cumulative function will be divergent, helping students and researchers alike.

infinity is the devil:

infinity is not real folks, both analytically and logically. you can see the pitfalls of assuming limits to infinity ever actually get there as i demonstrated above. thats right. you can never evaluate a limit because the function never actually takes it as a domain, therefore a limit is only connected to the ring surrounding the point and not the point itself. its almost real but not quite. therein is why it is devilish: it is pretty and convincing, but it is knowingly abandoning truth and gods real design of logic space..

>>11108396
t. failed first semester calc

>>11108366
>t. never saw the definition of a limit in his life

Limits occur at an assymptote,
A practical real world example of a limit is the charging of a capacitor, the voltage of the capacitor will never reach the voltage of the source, because of leakage, so if you graph the cap voltage you get a limit assymptote.
It's not that mysterious.

>>11109120
So that's why I have to become the next Hitler and sacrifice myself via suicide at some key moment, saving the white race?

>>11108366
it literally is, its like summing infinite series. You are getting caught up on semantics.

>>11108396
>t.atheist that just finished calculus and is role playing as a stupid christian because hes resentful and hates religious people

>>11108359
>always gettiing smaller.
>infinity is a diesel engine chugging along
no you dumb retard shitstain, it isn't even a number

>>11108359
>he's never heard of analytic projective geometry
Yes there are ""limits" "at" "infinity""

>>11108359
>making retarded leaps of faith
/pol/yp can't into rudimentary analysis how surprising

>>11108359
>but always gettiing smaller
You think infinity is simply an ever increasing quantity, but that's incorrect.

>>11108359
Define a function [math]f \colon (-1,1) \to \mathbb{R}[/math] by the formula [math]f(x) = \tfrac{1-x^2}{x}[/math]. Do you have a problem with saying that the limit of [math]f(x)[/math] for [math]x \to 1[/math] is ""equal"" to [math]0[/math]?

You don't know the formal definition of "limit at infinity."