Sequence such that every subsequence can have a different real limit [duplicate]

Multi tool use
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Give an example of a sequence of real numbers with subsequences converging to every real number
3 answers
I would like to find a sequence of real numbers $(a_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ with this property: for any $Linmathbb{R}$ there is a subsequence $a_{k_n}$ such that $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_{k_n} = L$$ Does such a sequence exist?
sequences-and-series limits analysis
marked as duplicate by Martin R, Community♦ 14 hours ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Give an example of a sequence of real numbers with subsequences converging to every real number
3 answers
I would like to find a sequence of real numbers $(a_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ with this property: for any $Linmathbb{R}$ there is a subsequence $a_{k_n}$ such that $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_{k_n} = L$$ Does such a sequence exist?
sequences-and-series limits analysis
marked as duplicate by Martin R, Community♦ 14 hours ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
up vote
8
down vote
favorite
This question already has an answer here:
Give an example of a sequence of real numbers with subsequences converging to every real number
3 answers
I would like to find a sequence of real numbers $(a_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ with this property: for any $Linmathbb{R}$ there is a subsequence $a_{k_n}$ such that $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_{k_n} = L$$ Does such a sequence exist?
sequences-and-series limits analysis
This question already has an answer here:
Give an example of a sequence of real numbers with subsequences converging to every real number
3 answers
I would like to find a sequence of real numbers $(a_n)_{ninmathbb{N}}$ with this property: for any $Linmathbb{R}$ there is a subsequence $a_{k_n}$ such that $$lim_{ntoinfty} a_{k_n} = L$$ Does such a sequence exist?
This question already has an answer here:
Give an example of a sequence of real numbers with subsequences converging to every real number
3 answers
sequences-and-series limits analysis
sequences-and-series limits analysis
edited 17 hours ago
Especially Lime
21.2k22655
21.2k22655
asked 17 hours ago


Riccardo Cazzin
1905
1905
marked as duplicate by Martin R, Community♦ 14 hours ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by Martin R, Community♦ 14 hours ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago
add a comment |
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Just arrange the set of rational numbers in a sequence ${a_n}$. Given any real number $L$ and any positive integer $n$ there are infinitely many rationals in $(L-frac 1 n, L+frac 1 n)$. Pick $a_{n_1}$ in this interval with $n=1$. Then consider the case $n=2$. You can surely find $n_2 >n_1$ such that $a_{n_2} in (L-frac 1 2, L+frac 1 2)$. Use induction to construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ such that $|a_{n_k}-L| <frac 1 k$ for all $k$. Then $a_{n_k} to L$.
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
Take the sequence that sweep the interval $[-1,1]$ by $1/2$ steps, then the interval $[-2,2]$ by $1/2^2$ steps, then the interval $[-n,n]$ by $1/2^n$ steps... and so on.
You’ll be able to prove that every real is a limit point of that sequence.
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Rephrasing:
Consider $a_n$, $n=1,2,3,3,....,$ the sequence of rational numbers. Recall that $mathbb{Q}$ is countable, hence can be written as a sequence $a_n$, $nin mathbb{N}$.
Let $L in mathbb{R}$.
Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, we can construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ that converges to $L$.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Consider a general topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ and a sequence of points $x in X^{mathbb{N}}$. One says that point $t in X$ is adherent to the sequence $x$ (some authors use the terminology 'cluster-point', but I don't fancy it so much) if:
$$(forall V, n)(V in mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x) wedge n in mathbb{N} implies (exists m)(m geqslant n wedge x_m in V ))$$
where $mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x)$ symbolizes the filter of neighbourhoods of point $x$ induced by the topology $mathscr{T}$. In a more descriptive fashion, $t$ is adherent to sequence $x$ if any neighbourhood of $t$ contains terms of arbitrarily high rank from the sequence $x$. If the filter of neighbourhoods of $t$ admits a countable base, then $t$ can be expressed as the limit of a subsequence of $x$. Therefore, in a space satisfying the First Axiom of Countability (i.e. all points have a countable base of neighbourhoods), the points adherent to a given sequence $x$ can be equivalently characterised as limits of subsequences of $x$.
Now, if the space $X$ is non-empty and separable, let us fix a certain dense subset $T subseteq X$. As $X$ is non-empty, so must $T$ be. It is not difficult to show that a non-empty countable set $M$ admits a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow M$ such that for each $t in M$ the fibre $sigma^{-1}({t})$ be infinite.
Consider such a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow T$ and define the sequence $t=(sigma(n))_{n in mathbb{N}}$ (which is actually the graphic of map $sigma$). The condition on the cardinality of the fibers ensures that any element $x in T$ is the limit of a (constant) subsequence of $t$. If we furthermore assume that the space $(X, mathscr{T})$ is $T_1$, then any $x in X setminus T$ will be an accumulation point of $T$ and thus necessarily adherent to sequence $t$.
To conclude, given a topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ that is non-empty, separable, first countable and $T_1$, one can always find a sequence $t$ of points within the space such that each element $x in X$ be expressible as the limit of a subsequence of $t$. This applies in particular to the topological space $(mathbb{R}, mathscr{O})$, where $mathscr{O}$ denotes the (usual) order topology.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Just arrange the set of rational numbers in a sequence ${a_n}$. Given any real number $L$ and any positive integer $n$ there are infinitely many rationals in $(L-frac 1 n, L+frac 1 n)$. Pick $a_{n_1}$ in this interval with $n=1$. Then consider the case $n=2$. You can surely find $n_2 >n_1$ such that $a_{n_2} in (L-frac 1 2, L+frac 1 2)$. Use induction to construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ such that $|a_{n_k}-L| <frac 1 k$ for all $k$. Then $a_{n_k} to L$.
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Just arrange the set of rational numbers in a sequence ${a_n}$. Given any real number $L$ and any positive integer $n$ there are infinitely many rationals in $(L-frac 1 n, L+frac 1 n)$. Pick $a_{n_1}$ in this interval with $n=1$. Then consider the case $n=2$. You can surely find $n_2 >n_1$ such that $a_{n_2} in (L-frac 1 2, L+frac 1 2)$. Use induction to construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ such that $|a_{n_k}-L| <frac 1 k$ for all $k$. Then $a_{n_k} to L$.
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
Just arrange the set of rational numbers in a sequence ${a_n}$. Given any real number $L$ and any positive integer $n$ there are infinitely many rationals in $(L-frac 1 n, L+frac 1 n)$. Pick $a_{n_1}$ in this interval with $n=1$. Then consider the case $n=2$. You can surely find $n_2 >n_1$ such that $a_{n_2} in (L-frac 1 2, L+frac 1 2)$. Use induction to construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ such that $|a_{n_k}-L| <frac 1 k$ for all $k$. Then $a_{n_k} to L$.
Just arrange the set of rational numbers in a sequence ${a_n}$. Given any real number $L$ and any positive integer $n$ there are infinitely many rationals in $(L-frac 1 n, L+frac 1 n)$. Pick $a_{n_1}$ in this interval with $n=1$. Then consider the case $n=2$. You can surely find $n_2 >n_1$ such that $a_{n_2} in (L-frac 1 2, L+frac 1 2)$. Use induction to construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ such that $|a_{n_k}-L| <frac 1 k$ for all $k$. Then $a_{n_k} to L$.
edited 17 hours ago
answered 17 hours ago


Kavi Rama Murthy
45.4k31853
45.4k31853
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
add a comment |
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Could you please explain better how it would work? Thanks
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's nice, we are then using that rationals are countable. Thanks for the clarification. Regards
– gimusi
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
Most welcome, @gimusi !
– Kavi Rama Murthy
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
Take the sequence that sweep the interval $[-1,1]$ by $1/2$ steps, then the interval $[-2,2]$ by $1/2^2$ steps, then the interval $[-n,n]$ by $1/2^n$ steps... and so on.
You’ll be able to prove that every real is a limit point of that sequence.
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
Take the sequence that sweep the interval $[-1,1]$ by $1/2$ steps, then the interval $[-2,2]$ by $1/2^2$ steps, then the interval $[-n,n]$ by $1/2^n$ steps... and so on.
You’ll be able to prove that every real is a limit point of that sequence.
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
Take the sequence that sweep the interval $[-1,1]$ by $1/2$ steps, then the interval $[-2,2]$ by $1/2^2$ steps, then the interval $[-n,n]$ by $1/2^n$ steps... and so on.
You’ll be able to prove that every real is a limit point of that sequence.
Take the sequence that sweep the interval $[-1,1]$ by $1/2$ steps, then the interval $[-2,2]$ by $1/2^2$ steps, then the interval $[-n,n]$ by $1/2^n$ steps... and so on.
You’ll be able to prove that every real is a limit point of that sequence.
answered 17 hours ago


mathcounterexamples.net
23.9k21753
23.9k21753
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
add a comment |
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
That's less intuitive at first!
– gimusi
17 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Rephrasing:
Consider $a_n$, $n=1,2,3,3,....,$ the sequence of rational numbers. Recall that $mathbb{Q}$ is countable, hence can be written as a sequence $a_n$, $nin mathbb{N}$.
Let $L in mathbb{R}$.
Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, we can construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ that converges to $L$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Rephrasing:
Consider $a_n$, $n=1,2,3,3,....,$ the sequence of rational numbers. Recall that $mathbb{Q}$ is countable, hence can be written as a sequence $a_n$, $nin mathbb{N}$.
Let $L in mathbb{R}$.
Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, we can construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ that converges to $L$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Rephrasing:
Consider $a_n$, $n=1,2,3,3,....,$ the sequence of rational numbers. Recall that $mathbb{Q}$ is countable, hence can be written as a sequence $a_n$, $nin mathbb{N}$.
Let $L in mathbb{R}$.
Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, we can construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ that converges to $L$.
Rephrasing:
Consider $a_n$, $n=1,2,3,3,....,$ the sequence of rational numbers. Recall that $mathbb{Q}$ is countable, hence can be written as a sequence $a_n$, $nin mathbb{N}$.
Let $L in mathbb{R}$.
Since $mathbb{Q}$ is dense in $mathbb{R}$, we can construct a subsequence $a_{n_k}$ that converges to $L$.
answered 17 hours ago
Peter Szilas
10.4k2720
10.4k2720
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Consider a general topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ and a sequence of points $x in X^{mathbb{N}}$. One says that point $t in X$ is adherent to the sequence $x$ (some authors use the terminology 'cluster-point', but I don't fancy it so much) if:
$$(forall V, n)(V in mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x) wedge n in mathbb{N} implies (exists m)(m geqslant n wedge x_m in V ))$$
where $mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x)$ symbolizes the filter of neighbourhoods of point $x$ induced by the topology $mathscr{T}$. In a more descriptive fashion, $t$ is adherent to sequence $x$ if any neighbourhood of $t$ contains terms of arbitrarily high rank from the sequence $x$. If the filter of neighbourhoods of $t$ admits a countable base, then $t$ can be expressed as the limit of a subsequence of $x$. Therefore, in a space satisfying the First Axiom of Countability (i.e. all points have a countable base of neighbourhoods), the points adherent to a given sequence $x$ can be equivalently characterised as limits of subsequences of $x$.
Now, if the space $X$ is non-empty and separable, let us fix a certain dense subset $T subseteq X$. As $X$ is non-empty, so must $T$ be. It is not difficult to show that a non-empty countable set $M$ admits a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow M$ such that for each $t in M$ the fibre $sigma^{-1}({t})$ be infinite.
Consider such a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow T$ and define the sequence $t=(sigma(n))_{n in mathbb{N}}$ (which is actually the graphic of map $sigma$). The condition on the cardinality of the fibers ensures that any element $x in T$ is the limit of a (constant) subsequence of $t$. If we furthermore assume that the space $(X, mathscr{T})$ is $T_1$, then any $x in X setminus T$ will be an accumulation point of $T$ and thus necessarily adherent to sequence $t$.
To conclude, given a topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ that is non-empty, separable, first countable and $T_1$, one can always find a sequence $t$ of points within the space such that each element $x in X$ be expressible as the limit of a subsequence of $t$. This applies in particular to the topological space $(mathbb{R}, mathscr{O})$, where $mathscr{O}$ denotes the (usual) order topology.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Consider a general topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ and a sequence of points $x in X^{mathbb{N}}$. One says that point $t in X$ is adherent to the sequence $x$ (some authors use the terminology 'cluster-point', but I don't fancy it so much) if:
$$(forall V, n)(V in mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x) wedge n in mathbb{N} implies (exists m)(m geqslant n wedge x_m in V ))$$
where $mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x)$ symbolizes the filter of neighbourhoods of point $x$ induced by the topology $mathscr{T}$. In a more descriptive fashion, $t$ is adherent to sequence $x$ if any neighbourhood of $t$ contains terms of arbitrarily high rank from the sequence $x$. If the filter of neighbourhoods of $t$ admits a countable base, then $t$ can be expressed as the limit of a subsequence of $x$. Therefore, in a space satisfying the First Axiom of Countability (i.e. all points have a countable base of neighbourhoods), the points adherent to a given sequence $x$ can be equivalently characterised as limits of subsequences of $x$.
Now, if the space $X$ is non-empty and separable, let us fix a certain dense subset $T subseteq X$. As $X$ is non-empty, so must $T$ be. It is not difficult to show that a non-empty countable set $M$ admits a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow M$ such that for each $t in M$ the fibre $sigma^{-1}({t})$ be infinite.
Consider such a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow T$ and define the sequence $t=(sigma(n))_{n in mathbb{N}}$ (which is actually the graphic of map $sigma$). The condition on the cardinality of the fibers ensures that any element $x in T$ is the limit of a (constant) subsequence of $t$. If we furthermore assume that the space $(X, mathscr{T})$ is $T_1$, then any $x in X setminus T$ will be an accumulation point of $T$ and thus necessarily adherent to sequence $t$.
To conclude, given a topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ that is non-empty, separable, first countable and $T_1$, one can always find a sequence $t$ of points within the space such that each element $x in X$ be expressible as the limit of a subsequence of $t$. This applies in particular to the topological space $(mathbb{R}, mathscr{O})$, where $mathscr{O}$ denotes the (usual) order topology.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Consider a general topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ and a sequence of points $x in X^{mathbb{N}}$. One says that point $t in X$ is adherent to the sequence $x$ (some authors use the terminology 'cluster-point', but I don't fancy it so much) if:
$$(forall V, n)(V in mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x) wedge n in mathbb{N} implies (exists m)(m geqslant n wedge x_m in V ))$$
where $mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x)$ symbolizes the filter of neighbourhoods of point $x$ induced by the topology $mathscr{T}$. In a more descriptive fashion, $t$ is adherent to sequence $x$ if any neighbourhood of $t$ contains terms of arbitrarily high rank from the sequence $x$. If the filter of neighbourhoods of $t$ admits a countable base, then $t$ can be expressed as the limit of a subsequence of $x$. Therefore, in a space satisfying the First Axiom of Countability (i.e. all points have a countable base of neighbourhoods), the points adherent to a given sequence $x$ can be equivalently characterised as limits of subsequences of $x$.
Now, if the space $X$ is non-empty and separable, let us fix a certain dense subset $T subseteq X$. As $X$ is non-empty, so must $T$ be. It is not difficult to show that a non-empty countable set $M$ admits a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow M$ such that for each $t in M$ the fibre $sigma^{-1}({t})$ be infinite.
Consider such a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow T$ and define the sequence $t=(sigma(n))_{n in mathbb{N}}$ (which is actually the graphic of map $sigma$). The condition on the cardinality of the fibers ensures that any element $x in T$ is the limit of a (constant) subsequence of $t$. If we furthermore assume that the space $(X, mathscr{T})$ is $T_1$, then any $x in X setminus T$ will be an accumulation point of $T$ and thus necessarily adherent to sequence $t$.
To conclude, given a topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ that is non-empty, separable, first countable and $T_1$, one can always find a sequence $t$ of points within the space such that each element $x in X$ be expressible as the limit of a subsequence of $t$. This applies in particular to the topological space $(mathbb{R}, mathscr{O})$, where $mathscr{O}$ denotes the (usual) order topology.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Consider a general topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ and a sequence of points $x in X^{mathbb{N}}$. One says that point $t in X$ is adherent to the sequence $x$ (some authors use the terminology 'cluster-point', but I don't fancy it so much) if:
$$(forall V, n)(V in mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x) wedge n in mathbb{N} implies (exists m)(m geqslant n wedge x_m in V ))$$
where $mathscr{V}_{mathscr{T}}(x)$ symbolizes the filter of neighbourhoods of point $x$ induced by the topology $mathscr{T}$. In a more descriptive fashion, $t$ is adherent to sequence $x$ if any neighbourhood of $t$ contains terms of arbitrarily high rank from the sequence $x$. If the filter of neighbourhoods of $t$ admits a countable base, then $t$ can be expressed as the limit of a subsequence of $x$. Therefore, in a space satisfying the First Axiom of Countability (i.e. all points have a countable base of neighbourhoods), the points adherent to a given sequence $x$ can be equivalently characterised as limits of subsequences of $x$.
Now, if the space $X$ is non-empty and separable, let us fix a certain dense subset $T subseteq X$. As $X$ is non-empty, so must $T$ be. It is not difficult to show that a non-empty countable set $M$ admits a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow M$ such that for each $t in M$ the fibre $sigma^{-1}({t})$ be infinite.
Consider such a surjection $sigma: mathbb{N} rightarrow T$ and define the sequence $t=(sigma(n))_{n in mathbb{N}}$ (which is actually the graphic of map $sigma$). The condition on the cardinality of the fibers ensures that any element $x in T$ is the limit of a (constant) subsequence of $t$. If we furthermore assume that the space $(X, mathscr{T})$ is $T_1$, then any $x in X setminus T$ will be an accumulation point of $T$ and thus necessarily adherent to sequence $t$.
To conclude, given a topological space $(X, mathscr{T})$ that is non-empty, separable, first countable and $T_1$, one can always find a sequence $t$ of points within the space such that each element $x in X$ be expressible as the limit of a subsequence of $t$. This applies in particular to the topological space $(mathbb{R}, mathscr{O})$, where $mathscr{O}$ denotes the (usual) order topology.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 15 hours ago


ΑΘΩ
1862
1862
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
ΑΘΩ is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
shwzU,YqDUhUmkpAzI,B8A5wG29aoj
Otherwise said, the set ${ a_n | ninmathbb N}$ should be dense in $mathbb R$.
– Giuseppe Negro
17 hours ago