This was prob a messy proof. I think it is correct but maybe I should show explicitly why it would lead to a single-value intersection of the descending intervals. Or show that such a process for constructing descending intervals leads to one that is valid? Is that overthinking what I need to show?
Arula Ratnakar
I want to create Nested intervals w/ a goal of ending up with a final intersection that is just the supremum
To do this, I can create a descending sequence of intervals that satisfy the following properties. (I think anything that satisfies this will result in a supremum-only intersection)
(29/n)
