dlp211: that is the 9 repeats forever getting closer and closer and closer to 1.

so then your definition of infinity includes the fact that:

"forever getting closer" = "will eventually get there"

(new window)

holy crap that skit lasted FOREVER

///of course i wanted 10 hours of lancelot running, but youtube failed me :(

just like with asymptotes for example? do they eventually get there, but we just believe they don't because we haven't got the patience to find out...?

and you somehow know this as a fact? is it a scientific fact or some other kind? i'm intrigued

So, I'm late to the thread, and Darwin has already claimed everyone who doesn't think the answer is nine. The rule is - and always was - that multiplications and divisions have the same precedence, and happen from left to right, and that's that.

Silly me, though, I went to the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica online, to pull out a cite that it's always been that straightforward and unambiguous... and here's the kind of thing I found in Vol. 1, p. 600, right column: (new window)

"The rule as to using brackets is not always observed, the convention sometimes adopted being that multiplications or divisions are to be performed before additions and subtractions. [...] There are grave objections to an arbitrary rule of this kind, the chief being the useless waste of mental energy in remembering it."

The entire section has a far more snarky tone that I'd have guessed possible before reading this thread. So, hey, maybe this is something people really always have found ways to squabble about.

Whatever, though, Brittanica. The answer's nine, regardless of your grave objections.

I drunk what: 0.99999999 = 1.00000000 (bad logic)
0.999999999 = 1.000000000 (bad logic)

almost there...

0.9999999999 = 1.0000000000 (bad logic)

[then a miracle occurs]

0.999... = 1.000... (good logic)

therefore 0.9... = 1 (sound conclusion)

or something like that? correct me if i'm wrong

Well, you're wrong. Not much to tell you. There's no miracle, there's a fundamental difference between 0.999 and 0.999..., and you appear to be getting to two confused.

I drunk what: btw are you familiar with asymptotes?

Of course. Matter of fact, I have a long-running joke with a cousin of mine where we'll insist to anybody who listens that time is asymptotic.

I drunk what: let's say i'm a bank and you are one of my customers, now if you loan me $10 and i pay you back $9 are we square? no, because i still owe you a 1, huh? what if i paid you back a sufficiently large $9??

say maybe $9.90?? still owe you a dime, eh? alright then 9.99? oh you're one of them penny pinches, ok, 9.999?

Yep, that's about the gist of the famous nature of Zeno's paradoxes.

I drunk what: /logic usually trumps mathematics anyway

Nah. Logic is indistinguishable from mathematics. You've arrived at a contradiction now, "logic usually trumps logic".

Dr. Mojo PhD: There's no miracle, there's a fundamental difference between 0.999 and 0.999..., and you appear to be getting to two confused.

indeed as there is a difference between 0.999... and 1.000....

which of course is 0.000...0001...

but it's such a tiny minute difference, let's not split hairs

so let's just say that i paid you back a sufficiently large $9 plus your faith investment and call it square

please sign here on the dotted line

X........................

i'll just keep the difference and spend it on toys and candy

Dr. Mojo PhD: Nah. Logic is indistinguishable from mathematics.

well there is a 0.000...0001...% difference

in that math is a language of Man's feeble attempt to describe-communicate Logic, and sure we can get some stuff right, but we also tend to get some stuff wrong

and in this case you are 99.999...% correct, which is what we call "100% wrong" in the engineering business...

but if you work with architects and contractors we are also willing to settle for "good enough"

so then if that is actually True, then you win

//i'll keep my fingers crossed
/*rubs rabbit's foot*

Dr. Mojo PhD: Yep, that's about the gist of the famous nature of Zeno's paradoxes.

i never understood why it's a paradox... i mean sure it can be confusing trying to describe finite systems in infinite terms, such as the distance between Zeno and the arrow (a finite distance) divided up into a bunch of distances (infinite sections)

but what about abstract concepts that aren't limited to finite systems?

is logic-mathematics limited to such things?

perhaps the problem lies within Man's failure to understand Nature, but not with logic or math itself? just a guess

I drunk what: indeed as there is a difference between 0.999... and 1.000....

which of course is 0.000...0001...

Nope. That presumes that in any infinitesimal number, there's a limit or bound to that number. There isn't!

I drunk what: well there is a 0.000...0001...% difference

Still no!

I drunk what: and in this case you are 99.999...% correct, which is what we call "100% wrong" in the engineering business...

It's extremely disturbing to me that (at least some) engineers consider 100% correct to be 100% wrong.

I drunk what: indeed as there is a difference between 0.999... and 1.000....

which of course is 0.000...0001...

Or, put in two other ways:

To get 1 - 0.999... = 0.0...1

There would need to be an end to the 9...s, and there isn't.

To get 1 - 0.999... = 0.0...1...

There would need to be some decimal, somewhere in there that isn't 9 (but an 8), and there isn't that either.

It's just 9s, all the way down.

Dr. Mojo PhD: There would need to be an end to the 9...s, and there isn't.

precisely!

now you're beginning to understand this infinity stuff

Dr. Mojo PhD: It's just 9s, all the way down.

i thought it was turtles, and/or elephants?? an aardvark

well i noticed your objection to my [then a miracle occurs] was "nuh uh" however you've only re-emphasized the humor of the original joke



you see, if you are suggesting that a miracles does not occur you'll have to be a little more specific-explicit than "nuh uh"

or in other terms, for the fark audience



so then, why is the stuff above the miracle bad logic, but the part below somehow magically becomes good logic?

feel free to elaborate, and show your work

are you suggesting that the stuff above and below are not connected (mathematically-logically)?

oh and just for the record, i'm not the one who is confusing two different things:

Dr. Mojo PhD: and you appear to be getting the two confused.

since i never claimed that they were equal, i was simply repeating yours and other claims out loud to see if that is what you meant to say

i'm well aware of the difference of numbers, functions, terms, etc..

no matter how minuscule they may be :)

however if you are looking for people that are confusing (two separate things) "close enough" with "is exactly equal to" then i'm sure you can find some people somewhere in this thread...

I drunk what: precisely!

now you're beginning to understand this infinity stuff

Are you doing that thing people do sometimes where they're wrong and they know they're wrong, but they adopt a really condescending attitude and attempt to speak from the position they just claimed is wrong? Because that's a thing people do, and it's an annoying thing.

I drunk what: you see, if you are suggesting that a miracles does not occur you'll have to be a little more specific-explicit than "nuh uh"

Oh we did. We (not the royal or editorial we, multiple people) pointed out that as per your original example:

I drunk what: so then 9 = 10 ?

and 99 = 100
and 999 = 1000
and 9999 = 10000

These are all whole numbers. .999... repeating is a rational, infinitesimal number (and it is also 1).

I drunk what: so then, why is the stuff above the miracle bad logic, but the part below somehow magically becomes good logic?

That part above, where the thing I said is true, as has been demonstrated to you.

I drunk what: oh and just for the record, i'm not the one who is confusing two different things:

They aren't two different things. You're insisting they are, and that's a thing you can do, but you're doing it in ways that involve confusing natural numbers with rational numbers.

1 = ¹/₁ = 1.0 = ⁵⁶⁴²/₅₆₄₂ = 00000000001.00000000... = 0.999...

All ways of representing the same number.

Dr. Mojo PhD: There would need to be an end to the 9...s, and there isn't.

however IF there was an end (which there isn't) we do know that it would be a 9, and since you can claim that 0.999... = 9's FOREVER

i can also claim that the difference is a 0.000...1 FOREVER

1 - 0.9 = 0.1 (good logic)
1 - 0.99 = 0.01 (good logic)
1 - 0.999 = 0.001 (good logic)
1 - 0.9999 = 0.0001 (good logic)
...
[no miracle occurs] (good logic)
...
1 - 0.999... = 0.000...1 (good logic)

ad infinitum

FOREVER and always

/amen
//no need for faith

QED

just because that difference is really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really small, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist

regardless of whether or not your finite little brain can comprehend it

it just keeps on existing, wrecking ur maths :P

but just for the sake of argument, i'm willing to concede in this little finite universe of ours, it's probably close enough, that i won't fight you to the death about it :3

/lets bygones be bygones

I drunk what: however IF there was an end (which there isn't) we do know that it would be a 9, and since you can claim that 0.999... = 9's FOREVER

i can also claim that the difference is a 0.000...1 FOREVER

You can claim that. It doesn't mean you'll be right, but it is a thing you can do. You can also claim that 2 + 2 = cake, if that catches your fancy.

The problem here is that 0.0...01 FOREVER is that that 1 will never be arrived at for the difference to be calculated. Ever. It's just not possible when dealing with the number 0.999...

So, it doesn't exist.

I drunk what: 1 - 0.999... = 0.000...1 (good logic)

Nope, that's just seriously terrible logic. You're saying (finite thing) minus (infinitesimal thing) equals (finite thing). It's not possible. Under any circumstances.

If 0.999... did end, to give a solution of 0.0...01, it would not be 0.999..., it would be 0.999...9 -- an entirely different, finite number.

I drunk what: just because that difference is really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really small, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist

No, but the fact that it doesn't exist means it doesn't exist.

Oh god what have I done

I didn't actually expect anyone to bite on the 0.999... thing...

I drunk what: i can also claim that the difference is a 0.000...1 FOREVER

Yes, you can. Except that number, if you can say it exists, equals 0. Though most people will say it doesn't exist.

Here's a question. Between any two real numbers is another real number. Between 0 and 1 is 0.5. Between 0.5 is 0.25. Between 0 and 0.25 is 0.125. I can always subtract, divide by 2, and add that to the lower number and I will get something which is bigger than the lower number and smaller than the upper number. (In addition to this hand-wavy proof it's possible to do it completely formally based on the definition of real numbers in terms of Dedekind cuts or whatever your favorite definition is.)

Give a real number which is between 0.99... and 1. If they are not equal, there is one.

Lsherm: Dr. Mojo PhD: It's extremely disturbing to me that (at least some) engineers consider 100% correct to be 100% wrong.

I'm an old engineer, and I don't know if he wasn't paying attention in math class or if he's deliberately farking with you. Either way, he's wrong. It's like he never took limits, which he should have covered in high school if he's not retarded.

I'm weeping for the kids these days.

As an engineer, I would hope so. The problem I see with "engineers" is that it's easy to claim to be an engineer and a lot harder to be an engineer. Aerospace engineer, circuit engineer, waste services engineer. One of these engineers, in the immortal words of Sesame Street, is not like the others. Thing is, it's gone from "people who use logic, science, and mathematics to solve problems" to "people who solve problems". Poop in your yard from a flooding septic tank? That's a problem, and let's face it, it needs solving.

evaned: Oh god what have I done

dude, it's I drunk what..... Same posting style for years, and no post I've ever seen makes the slightest lick of sense. The passive aggressive undertone is just gravy.

Lsherm: I'm weeping for the kids these days.

yeah old engineer are automatically smarter than young ones, they give me a license purely based on my good looks and nintendo skills

the four semesters of calculus had nothing to do with it, i'm sure you took 4 semesters back in the day when calculus was all the rage

Dr. Mojo PhD: The problem I see with "engineers" is that it's easy to claim to be an engineer and a lot harder to be an engineer. Aerospace engineer, circuit engineer, waste services engineer. One of these engineers, in the immortal words of Sesame Street, is not like the others

oh wellz i'm just an uncivilized engineer, what do they know? i was only taught how to drive trains

Lsherm: Either way, he's wrong. It's like he never took limits, which he should have covered in high school if he's not retarded.

yep and they also taught you that all life came from a single celled organism and a while back schools taught that the earth was flat, and schools are never wrong and we should never question them

i weep for the old people

but just so you can keep up, i never claimed that there wasn't a limit to the function of 0.999... i'm simply questioning the conclusion that it is exactly equal to 1.000....

but hey sorry we used big words and stuff, i'll try to draw pictures if that will help



was anyone in this thread claiming that the limit is not 1?? i guess you're one of those senile out folgy's

but hey let's just appeal to authority, smoke our pipes

matlock should be on soon anyway

I drunk what: i never claimed that there wasn't a limit to the function of 0.999...

0.999... isn't a function any more than 1.0 is a function.

(That is, you can look at it as a nullary function if you really want. But it's not some function of x, or the number of digits you want to expand, or anything. Hence it doesn't approach anything, because it's not moving in the first place.)

Dr. Mojo PhD: You can claim that. It doesn't mean you'll be right, but it is a thing you can do. You can also claim that 2 + 2 = cake, if that catches your fancy.

is it a sufficiently large cake?

Dr. Mojo PhD: Nope, that's just seriously terrible logic. You're saying (finite thing) minus (infinitesimal thing) equals (finite thing). It's not possible. Under any circumstances.

nope the 0.000...1 is my sloppy shorthand for an infinitesimal thing which i forget the proper way to write it, but you should have known what i meant, but perhaps i over estimated ya? sorry

would you prefer 0.000...1... ?

or would confuse even more people into thinking it says 0.000...11111...

anyways you'll figure it out, the infinite thing that remains the difference

Dr. Mojo PhD: Poop in your yard from a flooding septic tank? That's a problem, and let's face it, it needs solving.

so then drive a train through it?? get 'er done

yep and we don't waste our time with that silly lawgix, syunce and mathus to complicate stuff, we just randomly push buttons on our ipads and it magically does it for us

i'd love to keep this going but its almost nap time and my meds are wearing off

I drunk what: nope the 0.000...1 is my sloppy shorthand for an infinitesimal thing which i forget the proper way to write it, but you should have known what i meant, but perhaps i over estimated ya?

That "infinitesimal thing" isn't a real number.

Wow. This is a pretty popular equation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZe9_LWlOtM

Dr. Mojo PhD: It's just not possible when dealing with the number 0.999...

nor is traveling faster than the speed of sound, it's just not possible, therefore that speed does not exist

evaned: Oh god what have I done

I didn't actually expect anyone to bite on the 0.999... thing...

there's no rage, like math nerd rage

it's more of a logic problem than a math problem anyway...

i think we're soon going to find the limits of math's ability

evaned: Yes, you can. Except that number, if you can say it exists, equals 0.

well that's convenient, but is it true?

evaned: Though most people will say it doesn't exist.

well the ole farts seem to be partial to appealing to authority, but perhaps you'd feel better just appealing to the majority?

maybe we should vote on it

/the proper way to gain understanding...

evaned: Give a real number which is between 0.99... and 1. If they are not equal, there is one.

i already did

1 - 0.999... = 0.000...0001.. or however you write that thing, abbey reminded me once but i forgot

hey abb3w what was that thing again?

/and it's more like a function than a "number"

and yes 0.999... is a function, sorry lad

the limit is 1 and that is all i'm going to concede

i say it's an asymptotic relationship and that's that

but seriously any of you old timers that want to sign up with my bank, i'd be happy to spend your money, i take paypal, credit cards, check or money orders

evaned: something which is bigger than the lower number and smaller than the upper number.

well there is also the problem of terminology where people want to equate the terms "no difference" with "same as" which gets into the hair splitting of this insanity whereas things like 1 + 1 = 2 is a case of "no difference" and for all intents and purposes is close enough to "same as", but the problem with infinite functions like 0.999 especially when trying to use it with finite terms like 1, gets into the nasty hair splitting bickering of distinguishing the difference between "no difference" yet not "same as" which of course is really really hard to describe in coherent terms

but i'd say it's something like being in a room that is 1 high and the ceiling is immovable and you are growing in that room infinitely getting closer to the ceiling even to the point where there is theoretically "no difference" between the space between your head and the ceiling (yet you cannot become 'one with the ceiling'), and never being able to reach the same height of the ceiling.

and since at that point there is no mathematical description or number to describe what the difference is, some people feel the need to conclude that they are equal

yet as we noted earlier that ceiling is immovable. period.

now in order to eventually become one with the ceiling you'd have to add a unit that contains a real number

however the function 0.999... is simply adding an infinitely smaller fraction of numbers, which will eventually disappear into nothing (speaking in terms for a finite universe-system), which means just before you can reach the same height of the ceiling the part you are adding will disappear, therefore you will get as close as logically possible, yet you will not reach that point, aka = 1

you'll be stuck just below it at 0.999....

/forever

abbey might be able to translate all the gibberish into math-speak but i don't think he's here, nor do i care to do the math nerds jobs for them, i got my own fish to fry

just some food for thought, do with it what you will

no skin off my nose

evaned: I drunk what: nope the 0.000...1 is my sloppy shorthand for an infinitesimal thing which i forget the proper way to write it, but you should have known what i meant, but perhaps i over estimated ya?

That "infinitesimal thing" isn't a real number.

actually it's more like a function, but yeah

do you feel like it will become true if you keep repeating it?

let's try it

me: 0.1 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.01 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.001 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.0001 is a real number
you: no it's not

to infinity and beyond!!1! (no miracles occurred)

me: 0.000...1 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.000...1 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.000...1 is a real number
you: no it's not

ad infinitum

now at first you'll be like, dude the top stuff are real numbers, but then i'll remind you that no miracles occurred between the top part and the bottom part, and then you'll suddenly suggest that it magically ceases to be a "real" number or is somehow equal to zero, because that would sure make your math homework a lot easier if that stupid IDW would stop asking so many questions!!!1!

and then we will bicker and fight about infinite vs. finite and who killed who, and the circle will begin again, forever

I drunk what: actually it's more like a function, but yeah

do you feel like it will become true if you keep repeating it?

let's try it

me: 0.1 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.01 is a real number
you: no it's not

It's amusing because it's the total opposite way around

- 0.999... is another way of representing 1 and here's several mathematical proofs
- NO IT'S NOT!
- 0.999... is another way of representing 1 and here's several mathematical proofs
- NO IT'S NOT!

Yes, it is.

I drunk what: because that would sure make your math homework a lot easier if that stupid IDW would stop asking so many questions!!!1!

What field, exactly, are you an engineer in? I'm curious as to why they never covered this in whatever high school you went to.

Aunt Crabby: Kahabut:

Kahabut: You do realize that there is no functional difference between a fraction of 6/2 and the mathematical operation of 6 divided by 2. Right?

You know how / came into use for fractions and for division? Because there is no difference.

The reason we got into the discussion is because I asked how a non math person would know 6/2(1+2) was not a fraction with 6 in the numerator and 2(1+2) in the denominator. He told me i needed to see it as division and not a fraction. it makes a difference because if it were a fraction 6/2(1+2) would be

6
-----------
2(1+2)

and not (6/2) (1+2).

It's ambiguous unless you use two sets of parentheses in the expression even if you don't get into the implied multiplication precedence debate. I'm just pointing out that if you see \ as the division between a numerator and denominator, everything that follows the \ is in the denominator unless you clarify it in some way. 6/2 as a fraction is the same as 6 divided by two but six all over two times (one plus two) as a big old fraction is not the same as 6 divided by two times (one plus two). If you see \ as a line between the top and bottom of an expression with multiple parts on the bottom, it is different than seeing it as a division sign. The meaning of the symbol matters when the expression becomes more complex.

Also is 2 1/2 dozen cookies twelve cookies? If we use two times one divided by two it is. If we treat 1/2 as a fraction instead of seeing \ as a division sign, we get more cookies. I would rather have 30 cookies.

Actually, its not ambiguous, you were just taught wrong. I'm sorry.

You can not write the equation
6
___________
2(1+2)

as 6/2(1+2)= The reason you can't, is because they are two different equations. For the record, if you wanted to write the equation you talk about, it would be like this 6/(2(1+2))= See why it's not ambiguous?

Technically speaking, if 6/2 is a fraction, it doesn't change a damn thing. If 6/2(1+2)= is considered a fraction, then you could express it like this
6
___ * (1+2)= Which is THE EXACT SAME THING AS 6/2(1+2)=
2

I realize that some people were taught this incorrectly, but it's really a simple matter of syntax. Syntax MATTERS. You people that think you can just change it, you are wrong. If I use the word "water" to mean fire, you would think I was an idiot. Rightly so. You see the problem then...

Dr. Mojo PhD: I drunk what: actually it's more like a function, but yeah

do you feel like it will become true if you keep repeating it?

let's try it

me: 0.1 is a real number
you: no it's not
me: 0.01 is a real number
you: no it's not

It's amusing because it's the total opposite way around

- 0.999... is another way of representing 1 and here's several mathematical proofs
- NO IT'S NOT!
- 0.999... is another way of representing 1 and here's several mathematical proofs
- NO IT'S NOT!

Yes, it is.

I drunk what: because that would sure make your math homework a lot easier if that stupid IDW would stop asking so many questions!!!1!

What field, exactly, are you an engineer in? I'm curious as to why they never covered this in whatever high school you went to.

where did i say no it's not? use the quote button

they teach engineering courses at your high school? wow that's neat

i already told you what field, i'm an uncivilized "toilet" engineer as you put it, obviously nothing near as dignified as your holy discipline

DarwiOdrade:
[www.stencilsanddecals.com image 300x300]

oh too fancy according to them i'm probably a janitor or something, because it's unpossible that i'm way smarter than they are, and that they are wrong

yeah that's it, i'm a janitor-toilet "engineer", who flunked high school where they teach engineering level calculus courses, that's the ticket

and in the old days they had 20-30 semesters of engineering level math classes (by the time they graduated high school), but now those stupid young kids just fail high school and become janitors to claim they are engineers

and that is why they are right, because shut up that's why

I drunk what: well that's convenient, but is it true?

Yes.

I drunk what: 1 - 0.999... = 0.000...0001.. or however you write that thing, abbey reminded me once but i forgot

Interesting. I didn't realize that 0.00..001 is bigger than 0.999...

Let me state my question again for the thick-headed: give me a real number which is larger than 0.9999... and smaller than 1.0.

I drunk what: and yes 0.999... is a function, sorry lad

What's it's arity? And what's the meaning of its arguments?

I drunk what: me: 0.1 is a real numberyou: no it's notme: 0.01 is a real numberyou: no it's notme: 0.001 is a real numberyou: no it's notme: 0.0001 is a real numberyou: no it's not

How good of you to put words in my mouth. All of those are real numbers. 0.00...01 isn't; or if it is, it's 0.

Infinity is weird. But then, you already know that, because you're an engineer.

I drunk what: where did i say no it's not? use the quote button

Here, for one:

I drunk what: 0.9999999999 = 1.0000000000 (bad logic)

[then a miracle occurs]

0.999... = 1.000... (good logic)

And here:

I drunk what: 0.999... =/= 1.0...

abracadabra

/logic usually trumps mathematics anyway

I drunk what: i'm an uncivilized "toilet" engineer as you put it

I drunk what: oh too fancy according to them i'm probably a janitor or something

facepalm.jpg

I drunk what: because it's unpossible that i'm way smarter than they are, and that they are wrong

Oh it's possible you're way smarter than we are. You can even be wrong about this and still be smarter than us. It's just that, given your level of frustration, I doubt that you are.

Honestly, you do this for the attention or what?

Dr. Mogo PhD & I drunk what...

Will both of you please state your case in clear language? I can't sort out what you are even arguing about anymore.

You aren't seriously arguing if .999999999 is = to 1... right?

Kahabut: You aren't seriously arguing if .999999999 is = to 1... right?

They are not.

The confusion has to do with whether 0.9... is equal to 1 (the three periods there are key), not whether 0.999999999 (i.e. some finite number of trailing 9's) is equal to 1.
The trailing periods in "0.9..." imply an infinite series of 9's.

0.9... is equal to 1, and multiple posters have provided numerous well-known reasons why this is so.

The basic problem, i think, is that I drunk what does not, or chooses not to, understand these replies. Sadly, once (s)he learned (s)he was not capable of defending his(her) original claim, (s)he reverted to the sort of name-calling and passive-agressive deflections that one commonly sees in climate threads.

cheers

0.999... is not 1 but the difference between them is infinitely small. think what is 1-0.999...

it`s not 0 but is not distinguishable

For example (1-1)*infinity is 0*infinity which is 0

(1-0.999...)*infinity is (1/infinity)*infinity which can be calculated to be 1 or infinity depending on the maths you use. The main thing is, it is not 0.

therefore 1 is not 0.999... as you get different results from formulae with the two numbers. This is my proof, please disprove using maths.

Also, what is ((infinity*infinity*infinity)/infinity)+1?

drworm: ok, so we cleared up that the answer is 9 and how 1 was perceived as the answer. how the heck did the iphone get 2?

it just dropped the number before the parenthesis. In the comments someone tried it replacing the 2 with a 7 and still got 2 as the answer.

Don`t trust the maths on your Iproduct. It`s not good.

infinity is not a number

It's a concept related to numbers, but it is not a number. You can't do math using a variable that equals infinity. It makes no sense.

cheers

dready zim: This is my proof, please disprove using maths.

scroll up. Several different proofs are there (& several times)... cheers

dready zim: 0.999... is not 1 but the difference between them is infinitely small. think what is 1-0.999...

it`s not 0 but is not distinguishable

For example (1-1)*infinity is 0*infinity which is 0

(1-0.999...)*infinity is (1/infinity)*infinity which can be calculated to be 1 or infinity depending on the maths you use. The main thing is, it is not 0.

therefore 1 is not 0.999... as you get different results from formulae with the two numbers. This is my proof, please disprove using maths.

Your proof in no way involves math (because you attempt to use infinity as something it isn't). As for disproving with math (or, more accurately, proving 0.999... is 1), that's been done using all sorts of different methods in this thread. Digit manipulation, long division, geometric series, etc.

On the other hand, your "proof" involves accepting, at its most basic, the possibility that there is such a thing as ∞+1. There isn't, it's still just ∞.

By the way, the answer to (1-1)*∞ isn't 0. It's indeterminate. It's the same result you get if you try to divide by zero.

wjllope: infinity is not a number

It's a concept related to numbers, but it is not a number. You can't do math using a variable that equals infinity. It makes no sense.

cheers

Look, we both know that the "infinity" in the above expression is short for:

lim (1-1)*(x)
x->infinity

and even where x is infinite the answer is still 0

whereas

lim (1-0.999...)*(x)
x->infinity

is not 0 where x is the amount of decimal places you go to with the 0.999... plus 1

cheers. Now stop nitpicking notation. Semantic arguments belong elsewhere.

evaned: Infinity is weird.

finite beings trying to understand it is even weirder

most of us drink the same cool aid and fall for the same smoke and mirror tricks to get on with our lives and pretend to have mastered it so we can plug it into our calculators and give the absolute answer, and please our professors

in a finite universe it's close enough and most don't notice, life goes on

Dr. Mojo PhD: Here, for one

nuh uh

Dr. Mojo PhD: And here:

nuh uh

Dr. Mojo PhD: facepalm.jpg

hmmm:

I drunk what: i'm only a licensed professional engineer with a degree in engineering

do you know a lot of janitors that are licensed PE's with an engr. degree?

but you were correct i've engineered some poop systems in my day, and speaking of manure, this conversation reminds me a lot of those projects



it was fun skippy, we should do this again sometime

Dr. Mojo PhD: It's indeterminate.

Or, more specifically, undefined. Consider:

∞ + ∞ = ∞
^∞/_∞ = 1
^∞/_∞ + ^∞/_∞ = 1
1 + 1 = 1
2 = 1

Or:

^∞/_∞ + ^∞/_∞ + ^∞/_∞ = 1
1 + 1 + 1 = 1
3 = 1

This is why you can't do these things with infinity, and why ^x/₀ is equally undefined.

Also any number, even an infinite one multiplied by zero becomes zero. Division by zero is totally different.

I have zero apples. How many apples do I have if I multiply them by x?

dready zim: Now stop nitpicking notation. Semantic arguments belong elsewhere.

the difference between "infinity" and any "number" is not semantic, nor simply notation... cheers

I drunk what: in a finite universe it's close enough and most don't notice

Does your pointless complaint about this seriously boil down to you not being able to count to infinity in the physical universe?

I drunk what: it was fun skippy, we should do this again sometime

Yes, I have no doubt this will happen again - you'll make unparsable & incorrect comments, and then you will get called out on your mistakes.
Instead of simply saying, "you're right," or even, "I'm still not following you, but I'll read up on the subject myself, thanks for the comments," you resort to precisely the same tact you've been following for years: posting irrelevant pictures and condescending text as a deflection for actually trying to understand why your comments were wrong.

I have no problem with this, myself. If it's simply attention that you're looking for instead of learning, you always get it, so you've got that going for you.. cheers

dready zim: it`s not 0 but is not distinguishable

well not to some, but others can handle it

i have a really powerful magnifying glass :3

dready zim: Also any number, even an infinite one multiplied by zero becomes zero.

Nope. Infinity is not a natural number, it is not a whole number, it is not a rational number, it is not a real number, it is not a complex number, it is not an integer. Attempting arithmetic operations on it is meaningless, and for precisely the same reason dividing by zero is undefined. As in the case of /0, you can make any number x equal any number y.

wjllope: condescending text as a deflection for actually trying to understand why your comments were wrong.

I have no problem with this, myself. If it's simply attention that you're looking for instead of learning, you always get it, so you've got that going for you..



wjllope: posting irrelevant pictures

my pics are irreleveant??

Dr. Mojo PhD: As in the case of /0, you can make any number x equal any number y.

yeah, it's a NaN - which means Not a Number - meaning not a specific actual value that is natural, whole, real, complex, integer, or in a boat, with or without a goat.

Kahabut: Will both of you please state your case in clear language?

i believe 0.999... is an asymptotic function whose limit is less than 1

not less than or equal to

the current popular theory is that 0.999... is precisely equal to 1 and anyone who disagrees is a big stupid dumb head janitor and probably flunked high school

i think the difference between 1.0 and 0.999... is so tiny that even the smartest big brained mathematician cannot devise a proper way to accurately describe it and therefore feel confident to ascribe its insignificance to be the same as nothing-not existing

i have suggested the problem is more about logic and terminology than being able to derive algebra proofs to support one's position, but the old dogs and piled high deepers are appalled that i would ever question their traditional beliefs and demand an apology from me

but they aren't going to get it

i've clearly stated my reasoning multiple times in this thread if you'd like to continue the discussion

my view doesn't require any leaps of faith (or miracles), concerning logic

their view completely relies on assumptions, presumptions, optimistic confidence in obtuse math and the kool aid they were fed by their professors in order to receive a passing grade for that class

however i have yet to hear a single rebuttal to my logical proposition, that doesn't involve any algebraic rationalizations of trying to justify their wish-beliefs...

/not going to hold my breath either
//also not interested in the childish games of name calling and condescension

ready when you are

I drunk what:

I guess the first image means that you claim that I am "projecting". The second image is the cast of a TV show with the same title as a word that I commonly use at the end of my posts, which is often used in english as a friendly closing.

But, once again, you've taken the time to post text and pictures, and as much as I tried, I did not learn anything from it. It's clear to me that your posts are not intended to contain any actual information. NTTAWWT I guess. They are colorful at least. And you are always able to close your HTML tags, so you've got that going for you too - congrats on that. Slainte