>>10457610

>>10456733

ok let's say we have this:

[math]\lim_{x\rightarrow\infty}-\lim_{y\rightarrow\infty} , (x,y) \in \mathbb{N}[/math]

The problem with this is that it doesn't has any meaning but it would if we wouldn't write it up like an actual retard.

This functions can be executed by something in reality, f.e. you could try to count from x to inf without ever raising y or you could go like x+1 and y+1 or the other way -> y+1 and x+1. The way how the function is executed is hidden because inf says just "heh I'm totally random until I'm too big for you little boy".

And you actually didn't mean inf when writing this, you're meaning "arbitrary close to inf", not inf itself. If so then just write it down:

[math]\lim_{x\rightarrow k}-\lim_{y\rightarrow a} , (x,y) \in \mathbb{N} , (k,a) \in \textup{arbitrary high}\in

\mathbb{N} \textup{ simultaneously counted per cycle}[/math]