limits are silly, all you're doing is guessing that a value

>>8460573
It works. And if you don't think it works, have fun in mathematics without calculus.

>>8460588
everyone for over a thousand years managed to use math just fine without asspulling "hurr look we're ALMOST here somewhere, ergo we are."

it's so ironic to hear people praise calculus for making a rigorous model that generalizes all the dozens of parlor trick methods for finding the volumes of saddle shapes or the acceleration of an object, yet it relies on the idea of "approaching" a value. at least with methods of exhaustion you know what values you approach but with this it's just a guess.

>>8460593
>we're ALMOST here somewhere, ergo we are
it doesn't say that though. the function could have a hole at x, yet the limit as h approaches x can still exist.

>>8460573
look up the epsilon delta definition and then go the fuck back to high school.

>>8460573
Let me guess,
you just failed your pre-calculus in High School.

>>8460607
>converging upside down Ls somehow makes it less of a guess

lmao this shit is supposed to be taken seriously?

not gonna lie, did the standard math progression for an engineer at a reputable state uni and was never comfortable with limits

If your so booty blasted about limits, then go learn calculus with infinitesimals.

>>8460704
that's because mathematics for engineers is never rigorous, regardless of which university you go to

ergo you've never actually learned what limits are

Are you one of those people that insists you can just plug in values close to the one you're looking for and get an answer from there?

>>8460573

>how can calculus be taken seriously like this?

Because it works and lets you do practical things you wouldn't be able to do otherwise. You wouldn't be able to program artificial neural networks for example without having a way to calculate the partial derivatives of each node with respect to the error function to make the gradient descent algorithm work. And then you wouldn't have self-driving cars.

>>8460834
true but your post makes me think you are one of those fags who is getting like 60% in real analysis i and you think you are the greatest mathematician since jacob barnet

>>8460607
still makes the same assumptions

>>8460573
You point out legitimate concerns that late 19th early 20th century mathematicians had, which is why there is now a rigorous definition of a limit:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(%CE%B5,_%CE%B4)-definition_of_limit

File: QcJrDXp[1].jpg (244KB, 1164x662px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1164x662px

>>8460573
>how can calculus be taken seriously like this?
It can't.
Nobody will admit it, but calculus is a scam. It's lying jew science, just like womens' studies.

>>8460894
There is this fat slob in our math department that thinks physics and engineering owe the world to mathematicians because they invented the tools they use, even though he doesn't even have his undergraduate degree.

>>8460573
You can do calculus without limits!
The number e can be defined using supremum, no limits needed!

File: Capture.png (428KB, 1793x938px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 1793x938px

>>8460573

>>8460573
Aww, how cute, 6th graders are on 4chan now!

>>8460573
what's the big deal? I see nothing wrong with limits

>>8460573
Get off of 4chan, Wildburger.

>Math isn't a simple matter of calculation, and requires intuition
This and many other surprises await you in college

Wait until you realize what a sham real numbers are!

>>8461931
Tell that to my calculus teacher for the last two semesters. The guy is obsessed with calculation. I still have no idea what an integral actually is other than "a bunch of squares under a curve".

>>8460573
Where does the guessing come in?

>>8460834
>that's because mathematics for engineers is never rigorous, regardless of which university you go to
Objectively false