MathGroup Archive 2001

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Limit and Abs

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg31258] Re: Limit and Abs
  • From: DWCantrell at
  • Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 04:53:39 -0400 (EDT)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at

In a message dated 10/22/2001 17:38:26 GMT Daylight Time, 
tgarza01 at writes:

>  I'd hate to enter an argument on this topic, but even if, as you say,
>  "Interval[{0,1}]  provides more useful information than merely saying 
>  "does not exist".", the fact remains that the definition of limit is 

The definition of limit, appropriate to the context with which we are most 
familiar, is indeed precise. And so are definitions of limit in more general 

Note that Interval[{0,1}] is not a real number. Thus, when Mathematica says 
that this is the limit, you know that the limit, as a real number, does not 
exist. This is consistent with the simpler, more common notion of limit.

>  I wonder if it is
>  true that "Mathematica has a more generalized notion of
>  limit than is often used". If such were the case, it would be necessary to
>  redefine established mathematical concepts, wouldn't it?

No, because the generalization is consistent, so to speak, with the 
original, more restricted notion.


  • Prev by Date: Re: kepler equation
  • Next by Date: Re: FractionalPart
  • Previous by thread: Re: Limit and Abs
  • Next by thread: Front End, GUI for Application