Printable View
just testing the new postcount feature, spam spam spam <3
Anyways, a friend of me said that 0,99999999 etc (9's in the infinity) = 1, because you can't do 1 - 0,0(infinite zeros here)1. Imo it isn't that way, because there is always a difference, what are your opinions?
0,9999999(infinite) = 0,9999999(infinite)
1 - 0,0000(infinite zeros ) = 1
What he is saying is 1/9=.111111 ect 2/9=.22222 ect until 8/9 which =.888888... so where is the .99999? This discussion was on sythe some time back...
EDIT: Hmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus
To get from 1 to .9999..., you can't just subtract .000...1, you'd go too far.
So in essence, they'd have to be the same thing.
More to find out: http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55746.html
Wikipedia gives several proofs:
http://i34.tinypic.com/10eki1u.png
http://i34.tinypic.com/2ylqjqh.png
http://i36.tinypic.com/2yjojec.png
so in this same way does .59999... equal .6?
Probably, but it would be harder to make that proof.
Yes, .59999... = 6. Because, you can't go from 6 to 5.999999..
there are 101 proofs that it is, in fact, equal to 1. If you don't believe it, then give me a mathematical counter example which shows that it is not equal to one.
My favorite is assume that
x = .9999999..... Now times both sides by 10 to get
10x = 9.999999999.....
and subtract 1 x from both sides to get
9x = 9
divide by 9...
x = 1
Please, if you can see where I made a mistake I would love for you to point it out, however if you just want to say that it is different because you lack the understanding of what infinite really means, then don't bother posting.
wow, no offense but we sound like total geeks when we say stuff like this but i guess half the people here that are 30 or under will probably become very rich, a sweet job, or they won't leave the forum and live with there mom the rest of there lives. Buy the way i agree with Thevoiceinyorhead guy.
sweet
SCAR Code:if (not(Brain=Spam)) then
begin
WriteLn('The sky is falling!');
end
else
WriteLn('Brain = Phail.');
spam where postcounts dont add up eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVoiceInYourHead
My postcounts add up. I've been here since July of last year.
EDIT: April, sorry.
No no no noQuote:
Originally Posted by TheVoiceInYourHead
This section, posts don't add to your postcount.
Uhm. Pretty sure they do?
EDIT:
Ahh. No they don't. lol.
Yes I know, thats what it says in the first post...thats what it says in the sticky in this section...:rolleyes:
pwnt is all i can say
spam
Spamz0r, TheVoiceInYourHead = Failed, :D
~Eerik~
I can't remember what the full theory was (this is another thing), but it was something like that let's say value A, will never be 1 because it has to go through infinite 'subpoints' :(
All the proofs are incorrect, due to incorrect implementation of the method used to find the fraction of a recurring decimal. Pseudomathematics, in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrent of Flame
0.999..n will NEVER be equal to one.
The last decimal will allways make the difference.
And, I LOL'ed at that formula. Santy is right, the used the formula wrongly.
But there is no last number.
And no, they used the formula correctly.
At least you people understand the formula. I suck at maths so I just let my eyes glaze over when ever I see formulas :)
There's no last number in 0.99999999999... but there's a last number in 1.0. That just proves that it's incorrect.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVoiceInYourHead
And no, the formula is used incorrectly. When you use it to find the fraction of a recurring decimal, you have to isolate the non-recurring part from the recurring part, by multiplying by an integer multiple of 10. In 0.999999... the recurring and non-recurring can not be separated, and so the formula is not usable.
No. 0.999999... does not equal to 1.
Try in scar.
SCAR Code:begin
WriteLn(BoolToStr(0.999999999999 = 1));
end.
That's not suitable either...because SCAR doesn't let you declare recurring decimals :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Zytex!
Yea, try in scar :p
SCAR Code:program New;
var
i: Extended;
begin
i := 0.9999999999999999;
WriteLn(FloatToStr(i));
end.
SCAR automatically adds 1 to the last decimal place.
SCAR Code:Program New;
Var
I : Extended;
Begin
I := 0.9999999999999999;
WriteLn(FloatToStr(I - 0.1111111111111111));
End.
It does that because it thinks the 0.999~ is one.
SCAR Code:program New;
var
i : Extended;
begin
i := 0.99999999999;
WriteLn(FloatToStr(i - 0.11111111111));
end.
Ok, prove the proofs wrong. There was more then one there. Give me a counter example that proves there is a difference. especially the 10x It is a very common way of finding out the fraction of a repeating number. For example .333333... = x, 10x = 3.333333...., 9x = 3, x = 1/3. Gee, it works with that case perfectly. In fact, it works with every case perfectly as long as it is implemented correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santa_Clause
All of the math world has accepted .99999... = 1 as true. If you have taken calculus you know this. If you want to say it is not true then You need to provide an example which shows a difference between the two. If you can't provide one then your opinion of it being psuedomath is a wrong one.
Heres an easy way to explain this problem verbally. .9999... is infinitely close to 1. Because it is infinitely close, there is no difference in the two numbers, and now difference can be give. But wait, you may say, what about 0.0...01 Heres the problem with that, how many zeros are there? An infinite amount you say? Well then, that 1 doesn't exist because there will never be an end to the number of zeros. So as it turns out the difference between 1 and 0.99999.... is in fact 0.
Don't believe me? Ok take 1, and take .99999.... How do you get the difference of two numbers? You subtract the one from the other. So 1 - 0.99999... Do that one until you pound it through you head that there is no difference. If you somehow magically put a 1 at the end, you haven't written enough 0's.
My math teacher said that 0.999999999999..........=1
My college math teacher, I guess I should say professor.
With a Ph.D in mathematics....
It does in fact prove that it is 1.
If you can't go from .9999... to 1, then how is it a different number?
The answer is, "it's not". There's such a minuscule difference, that they are literally the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVoiceInYourHead
If you have two identical twins, you might say "they're exactly the same!", but there will always be an unnoticeable difference.
There is no difference between .99999... and 1, .555555 and .6, etc.
.5555... is not equal to .6, it is equal to .55555... .5999999... is equal to .6Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVoiceInYourHead
Your analogy is broken. You could, by the same logic, argue that x = 1 and y = 1 is really a different 1 because you are using x and y, therefor there is a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by ;473163
As previously stated, the difference is 0, not unnoticeably small, but 0. Until you stop looking at infinity as finite you'll never agree, but the fact of the matter is that infinity is not finite, it is, well, infinite. There is no difference (see my previous post).
the only true way for me to discribe it is .9 recuring is < 1 and is > 0.9 recuring altough maths tells me:
x = 0.9'
10x = 9.9'
9x = 9
9/9 = 1/1 = 1 :confused:
but look at it algabraicly ;)
y = .9'
x = y
10x = 10y
10x - 1x = 10y - y
9x = 9y
x = y
y = .9' so x = .9'
i hope ive confused enough people XD
Exactly right boberman.
Infinite does not end.
Which is why it's expressed as a loop:
∞
It has no beginning, nor end.
your "algabraic" proof is nothing more then saying "x = y", "x = .9999.." so y = .99999..Quote:
Originally Posted by bazzbarrett
It proves nothing. In order to prove that .99999 is not 1 you need to use the value in a situation that give a different result then if you use 1. Good luck trying to find one.