How to explain the following definition of $\lim\sup s_n$ intuitively?
let $\lim\sup s_n$=$l$
The definition is ($\forall t<l,\forall N,\exists n>N, s_n>t$) and ($\forall t>l,\exists N,\forall n>N, s_n<t$)
For the first one, if we have a increasing sequence from very negative to $0$, how is it still true. i.e. $\{-1, -0.5, ... , -0.00001,...\}$, here $\lim\sup s_n=0$. let $t=-1,$ so $t<0$, but not all terms are greater than $t$.
For the second one, I am also confused. I think It would be great if someone could show some valid examples.
Also when we prove the such limit exists, is it necessary to show both characteristics?
Your first criterion means that for all $t<l$, there exists a subsequence $s_{n_k}$ of $s_n$ such that all members of the subsequence are greater than $t$.
Your second criterion means that for every $t>l$ there exists a point in the sequence $s_n$ from which all sequence members are smaller than $t$.