This topic is not that easy if you want to learn it the rigorous way. So, don't worry too much if you don't get it immediately

.
I'll go a little back. You wrote:
The MIT professor uses the shorthand notation [itex]\Delta u[/itex] and [itex]\Delta v[/itex], where
[itex]\Delta u =u(x+\Delta x) - u(x)[/itex] and
[itex]\Delta v =v(x+\Delta x) - v(x)[/itex]
see
7m35s.
He then let's [itex]\Delta x[/itex] approach zero. Intuitively this means that [itex]u(x+\Delta x)[/itex] will approach [itex]u(x)[/itex]. Hence, [itex]\Delta u[/itex] approaches zero. The same goes for [itex]\Delta v[/itex].
More formally we can write:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}\Delta u= \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}[u(x+\Delta x)-u(x)][/itex] =
0
Read this as: The limit of "u(x+Δx)-u(x)" as Δx approaches zero equals
zero.
But I'll ask you this question: Why should [itex]u(x+\Delta x)[/itex] approach [itex]u(x)[/itex]? Or in other words, why is [itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}[u(x+\Delta x)-u(x)] = 0[/itex] valid?
This is our goal: We want to show that [itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}[u(x+\Delta x)-u(x)][/itex] =
0 (Goal-Equation)
-----
Let's examine the expression [itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}[u(x+\Delta x)-u(x)][/itex] carefully. We wish this expression to equal
zero.
It turns out that you can turn it into:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}[u(x+\Delta x)-u(x)] = \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) - \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} u(x)[/itex]
(Limit-Equation)
Do you see what I've done? I have applied the limit to each addend.
Now, let's plug the
(Limit-Equation) into the
(Goal-Equation):
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) - \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} u(x)[/itex] =
0
Let's manipulate it further:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) = \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} u(x) = u(x)[/itex]
(Make sure you understand why the last equal sign is valid)
So the final form is:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) =u(x)[/itex] (
Goal-Equation 2)
However, how can you show that
Goal-Equation 2 is true?
-------
We will now show that Goal-Equation 2 is true:
We assume that we can pull the limit into the argument of u. What I mean is the following:
Consider the left hand side of Goal-Equation 2: [itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x)[/itex]
Now, let's pull the limit into the argument of u, i.e. we throw the limit between the brackets:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) = u( \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} [x+\Delta x])[/itex]
Assumption: We are allowed to pull the limit into the argument
Since [itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} [x+\Delta x] = x[/itex], we can write:
[itex]\text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0}u(x+\Delta x) = u( \text{lim}_{\Delta x \rightarrow 0} [x+\Delta x]) = u(x)[/itex].
Thus, we have arrived at our Goal-Equation 2.
Note however: We have used an assumption. This assumption is also called continuity of a function.
Prof. Francis Su mentions this in his excellent lecture on Real Analysis at 48m07s. This lecture involves rigorous mathematics, i.e. it is very formal and uses proofs.