I am currently reading this introduction to hyperreal numbers. On the first page, to illustrate the problem with just taking hyperreal numbers to be sequences of reals, the following example is used: $$ (0,1,0,1,...) \cdot (1,0,1,0,...) = (0,0,0,...),$$ demonstrating that this fails to be a field. Thus, the construction using ultrafilters and taking sequences mod a certain equivalence relation is motivated.
I see how this construction works for convergent series. However, in the example above, I fail to see that this actually solves our problem. It still seems that we have zero divisors. If $(0,1,0,1...) \sim (0,0,0,0...)$ and $(1,0,1,0,...) \sim (0,0,0,0,...)$, then the sets $2\mathbb{N}, 2\mathbb{N}-1$ are contained in the ultrafilter, and since ultrafilters are closed under intersection, their intersection $\emptyset$ is as well. Thus, these two elements must be nonzero and we have zero divisors.
There must be an error in my reasoning, but unfortunately I don’t see where. The introduction cited uses the transfer principle to show that the hyperreal numbers do indeed form a field, but this feels kind of unsatisfactory given this example.