So there is this statement, claiming that N (Natural numbers) is not bounded above in R, which is really easy to prove, however after proving that they drew a conclusion as I saw in my lecture notes,
Conclusion; For every epsilon (I will write epsilon as e because I don't know how else to write it) greater than zero there exist n in N with 0<1/n<e
How did he drew this conclusion from the fact that N is not bounded above in R? From what I understand what this says , for every epsilon in R (that is greater than 0) you can find a natural number n that is bigger than him. Is this logic correct?