Let
be a sequence of events in some sample space
. Let
be an outcome.
In the following table, all statements in the "infinitely often" column are logically equivalent. Similarly, all statements in the "almost always" column are logically equivalent.
perspective |
infinitely often |
almost always
|
unions and intersections |
 |
|
first-order quantifiers |
 |
|
verbal expression |
for infinitely many  |
for almost all , i.e. for all but finitely many , i.e. for finitely many
|
lim sup/lim inf |
 |
|
limit of sup/inf |
 |
|
Analogy with sequences of real numbers
Let
be a sequence of real numbers, let
be a real number, and let
be a real number.
We say
is eventually
-close to
iff there exists some
such that for all
we have
.
We say that
is continually
-adherent iff for every
there exists some
such that
.
I think we can even define
.
-- I think this one is equivalent to infinitely often, which is confusing since now the quantifier order has seemingly switched.
but this makes sense in terms of strength of "infinitely often" vs "almost always". We have
, so if
(i.e.
is
-close to
almost always) then
(i.e.
is
-close to
infinitely often).
perspective |
infinitely often |
almost always
|
Tao's terminology (see his Analysis) |
is continually -adherent |
is eventually -close to
|
first-order quantifier |
for every there exists some such that  |
there exists some such that for all we have
|
|
for infinitely many  |
for all but finitely many
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|