Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #201 20110730 22:04:30
Re: Limits!Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #202 20110730 22:07:27
Re: Limits!Yes, I was tring to prove that without using series. "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #203 20110730 22:13:02
Re: Limits!I get it now! In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #204 20110803 04:09:06
Re: Limits!17) Last edited by gAr (20110803 04:14:13) "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #205 20110803 08:22:01
Re: Limits!
The limit needs to approach from the right side of 0, Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #206 20110803 14:10:03
Re: Limits!"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #207 20110803 15:31:53
Re: Limits!
I am not "forgetting about" ln(1  x). I was looking right at it and working with it, regardless if I mishandled it. x approaching 0 from either side is not an issue for ln(1  x), as it is 0. But x approaching 0 from the left side of ln(x) is a problem, just as it is for x approaching from the left of, say, x^x, as those limits do not exist. And where is ln(x) = ln(x) + ipi coming from? And then, why isn't your alleged expression this instead of what you typed, because you assumed x >0?   And  on usingLast edited by reconsideryouranswer (20110803 15:56:25) Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #208 20110803 15:43:10
Re: Limits!"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #209 20110803 18:10:57
Re: Limits!I see that you edited your post instead of replying. Have you read about complex numbers? It exists and it is ∞ and this is 1 Last edited by gAr (20110803 18:14:25) "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #210 20110804 00:38:07
Re: Limits!
Look at all of those negative xvalues approaching 0 from the left where x^x is real. Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #211 20110804 00:51:14
Re: Limits!I would suggest you to go to www.wolframalpha.com Code:Limit[x^x,{x>0},Direction>1] That would show you a graph along with the answer. "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #212 20110804 04:57:29
Re: Limits!
Notice in the folowing lines how I will use fractions that    I will use a fraction relatively much closer to 0:  Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #213 20110804 11:40:31
Re: Limits!Hi; That is not correct. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #214 20110804 14:15:02
Re: Limits!
No, the odd root of a negative integer is some type of negative real number. Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #215 20110804 14:34:57
Re: Limits!
Yes but check this out! You are forgetting there are also complex answers. Are not the roots of , , What I am saying is just because (1)^3 = 1 that does not mean ( 1) ^(1 / 3 ) is 1 solely. There are other answers. 3 of them as a matter of fact. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #216 20110804 16:54:52
Re: Limits!reconsideryouranswer, do you admit that you do not know complex numbers? "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #217 20110805 01:57:48
Re: Limits!
Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #218 20110805 02:08:04
Re: Limits!sqrt(1) doesnt exist because it is indefined. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #219 20110805 02:47:35
Re: Limits!
 *** Edit*** I will stop posting to this subject thread for the foreseeable future. Last edited by reconsideryouranswer (20110805 04:12:39) Signature line: I wish a had a more interesting signature line. #220 20110805 03:36:05
Re: Limits!Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #221 20110805 20:10:28
Re: Limits!18) "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #222 20110805 20:12:12
Re: Limits!hi guys, You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei #223 20110805 20:18:19
Re: Limits!Hi Bob, "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #224 20110805 20:27:44
Re: Limits!hi gAr Last edited by bob bundy (20110805 20:28:35) You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei #225 20110805 22:22:13
Re: Limits!hi gAr The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment 