III 1 C

III 1 C
Is it 0 or 4?
Excuse my retardness but after 2 hours of nothing I really need to know

Attached: IMG-20190413-WA0002.jpg (3264x1836, 597K)

Im gonna say 4

...

0*infinity

dohohohoho what a cheeky bastard

Bummer

Attached: 100% safe.gif (640x480, 7K)

Bafta man

Attached: 64A00772-F0D4-4320-92B1-B88C16877456.jpg (4032x3024, 1.89M)

Multam coaie

it's 0

multiply it out and plug in the 2.

Math degree here. It's undefined. Limits must be 2-sided, and f is not defined on numbers less than 2.

Physics degree here.
No, limits don't need to be "two sided". There's even limits on trajectories. Guess you're confusing it with "continuity".
Limit (from the right) is well defined and =0.

Sorry, make that 4.
hihi

4 from the right

>physics degree
>limits from the right
>doesn't use the 2^(+) notation
>domain of f isn't R\{2}
>I'm confusing it with continuity
>limit from the right = 0
It's clearly a trick question, and you're clearly a retard

It's 4.

Multiply it out before applying the limit condition.

>Trick question

I already posted the proof m8 why are you trying so hard
Trolling is so shit nowadays..

And your proof is wrong. Limits must be defined on both sides of a real number.

4

Shouldn't it become (x-2)*x + 4 from substituting and expanding? Then it should be 4.

If you’re torn between two answers just plug in a number that’s really really close to your limit. Like x=1.99.

Others already answered, but I'll do my part. Here, fag:

Attached: IMG_20190413_190058.jpg (4160x3120, 1.83M)