Moderat
Reputation
1,526
Top tag
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
 Aug 16 comment “So That” vs. “Such That” I thought about that @DavidMitra but then I considered that mathematicians were the most accustomed to the "pidgin English" (to quote Andrew's source) that mathematics is written in. Aug 16 asked Proving a continuity inequality Aug 16 comment “So That” vs. “Such That” Agreed, thank you @Andrew Aug 16 comment “So That” vs. “Such That” Thank you @MarkDominus, "terminology" is a more appropriate tag Aug 16 accepted Difference of two Cauchy Sequences Aug 16 accepted Proof of Non-Ordering of Complex Field Aug 16 accepted Proof by induction of Bernoulli's inequality $(1+x)^n \ge 1+nx$ Aug 16 accepted Find a sequence $\{a_n\}$ that converges to $a$ without getting “closer and closer” Aug 16 asked “So That” vs. “Such That” Aug 15 accepted Limit point versus limit and implications for convergence Aug 15 comment Limit point versus limit and implications for convergence So that sequence I have constructed works as a counterexample then. Thanks @DavidMitra Aug 15 comment Limit point versus limit and implications for convergence Does a sequence of this form "count"?: $(a_n) = 1$ for $n = 2k, k \in \mathbb N$, $(a_n) = n$ for $n = 2k - 1, k \in \mathbb N$? Aug 15 asked Limit point versus limit and implications for convergence Aug 15 accepted Proving that a sequence is Cauchy Aug 15 comment Proving that a sequence is Cauchy Thanks! I see the convergent series, which gives me the $N$ I need to pick. Aug 15 asked Proving that a sequence is Cauchy Aug 14 comment Counterexample Check for Sum of Limit Points of Subsequences Ah ok. Thank you all for your help, I am self-studying introductory real analysis and slowly getting the hang of the material. Aug 14 comment Counterexample Check for Sum of Limit Points of Subsequences Wondering @BrianM.Scott Aug 14 accepted Counterexample Check for Sum of Limit Points of Subsequences Aug 14 comment Counterexample Check for Sum of Limit Points of Subsequences @Rolando posted what looked like a proof of this conjecture, and then deleted it after you posted your answer. It looked something like this: Let $\epsilon >0$ be given. Since $a_n \to c$ and $b_n \to d$, there are $N_1, N_2$ such that for $l \ge N_1$, $k \ge N_2$ $|a_l - c| \le \epsilon/2$ and $|b_k - d| \le \epsilon/2$. Let $m = \max\{N_1, N_2\}$ and therefore we have for $n \ge m$ we have $|a_n - c + b_n - d| \le \epsilon$. Is the problem with his proof that he is not considering subsequences, and that he interpreted the limit points as limits?