@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 1 year agonear zeromander.xyzimagemessage-square108arrow-up1571
arrow-up1571imagenear zeromander.xyz@fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish • 1 year agomessage-square108
minus-square@agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglish13•1 year agoWhen taking about limits, you can approach 0 from the positive or negative direction, which can give very different results. For example, lim cotx, x->0+ = ∞ while lim cotx, x->0- = -∞
minus-square@Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglish16•1 year agoSpeaking as a mathematician, it’s not really accurate to call that -0.
minus-square@agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglish6•1 year agoYes, but it is infinitesimally close.
minus-square@Gladaed@feddit.delinkfedilinkEnglish2•1 year agoYou also can’t call something infinity. People call stuff names. It is just important that they define their terms well enough.
minus-square@Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglish2•1 year ago You also can’t call something infinity Why do you think that?
When taking about limits, you can approach 0 from the positive or negative direction, which can give very different results. For example, lim cotx, x->0+ = ∞ while lim cotx, x->0- = -∞
Speaking as a mathematician, it’s not really accurate to call that -0.
Yes, but it is infinitesimally close.
You also can’t call something infinity. People call stuff names. It is just important that they define their terms well enough.
Why do you think that?