|
|
Post by chaoman45 on Jan 27, 2009 21:12:12 GMT -6
The difference ain't that big of a difference between 1 and 0.9999999 but they aren't the same number/decimal(your rounding to the nearest interger) Like I said, if one tried to set an airplane in a path with a recurring decimal does not mean the direction doesn't exist. 0.999...° = 1°. In fact: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.999Yes, it's Wikipedia, but it's accepted by mathematicians across the world. In reality, the statement I made holds true, but all that has been done was that there are many differences between .999... and 1.
|
|
|
Post by abizarro on Jan 27, 2009 21:18:08 GMT -6
Like I said, if one tried to set an airplane in a path with a recurring decimal does not mean the direction doesn't exist. Planes are machines, machines have various flaws to ensue that they can work properly such as rounding up a number to make the destination easier.
|
|
|
Post by chaoman45 on Jan 27, 2009 21:38:31 GMT -6
Like I said, if one tried to set an airplane in a path with a recurring decimal does not mean the direction doesn't exist. Planes are machines, machines have various flaws to ensue that they can work properly such as rounding up a number to make the destination easier. Exactly, but the fact of the matter is that .999 recurring and 1 represent the same number.
|
|
|
Post by abizarro on Jan 27, 2009 21:40:16 GMT -6
they only represent the same number if you eventualy round up. they are not the same number.
|
|
|
Post by chaoman45 on Jan 27, 2009 21:45:37 GMT -6
they only represent the same number if you eventualy round up. they are not the same number. They are two different variations of writing the number, much like how you would use a fraction. Rather than copy/paste, I invite you to review the basic elements on how this can be proven: polymathematics.typepad.com/polymath/2006/06/no_im_sorry_it_.html
|
|
|
Post by abizarro on Jan 27, 2009 21:49:31 GMT -6
are you implying that that thought wasn't my own. I'm angry that you'd assume that i'm not clever enough to think of that myself although i am quite proud that you thought something i said was worthy of a copy/paste. EDIT: wait, were you saying you weren't going to copy/aste the info... now i feel like an idiot. EDIT2: i have reasons for not believing any of the theories on the page you linked. right now i'm just trying to figure out how to phrase them. i'll explain tomorrow i want to get my lets play finished tonight.
|
|
|
Post by panda on Jan 28, 2009 2:37:05 GMT -6
I'm not that good, I know + -, x, %, I can't do division, that's where I cross the line.
|
|
|
Post by swimming95 on Jan 28, 2009 5:35:38 GMT -6
You guys officially somewhat pissed me off. there is NO way that .99999... does NOT equal 1. Here are all of the reasons. I don't care if they are repeats. 1. Quickest reason: For two real numbers to be different, there has to be a number in between them. There is no number in between .9999... and 1
2. quickest mathematical reason: 1-.99999...=.000.... People might say that there is a 1 at the end but the zeroes go on forever so the 1 has no place at the end
3. My favorite: x=.9999... 10x=9.9999... subract x from each side 9x=9 x=9/9 x=1
4. along with number 1 assume that they are not equal (.999... != 1) ... so... .999... + P =1 for any positive p, it is greater than one so our assumption is false
5. division. let's use 81 INSTEAD of 90 to divide (the stars are there because tabs don't work) 0.9999... ----------- 9 | 9.0000... ****8.1 ****--- ****90 ****81 ****-- *****90 *****81 *****--- ******9...
6. The limits arguement so let's imagine a series of numbers (geometric) .9, .99, .999, .9999 and so on The sequence gets infinitely close to .9999... It also gets infinitely close to 1 It can only have one limit so .999... =1
I have more proofs but they are a little bit more complicated. Try to put any counter arguments by me, I will be happy to disprove them.
Also, I somewhat remember the proof for 1=2 but they all have a hidden flaw
|
|
|
Post by chaoman45 on Jan 28, 2009 12:36:16 GMT -6
You see, this theory is similar to the the halves problem. You can only travel half way each time between two points, dividing and dividing until you're down to atoms, then quarks, then God knows what else. When the smallest piece of existence is achieved, which is a mathematical impossibility because it goes on, it must go one way or the other, how in reality you'll be close enough to touch the destination within like a few divisions.
It doesn't seem logical but 0.99999999 = 1
|
|
|
Post by abizarro on Jan 28, 2009 13:23:17 GMT -6
so what your saying is in practice 0.9(recurring) equals one. But would you agree that in theory they do not?
If you do then we are in agreement and my whole argument was just a misunderstanding of what exactly we were arguing. If given the choice between theory and practice my brain immediately goes to theory. My point was there was an infinitely small difference between the two but as infinity is a theoretical place in practice they are the same nuber.
For the record i don't agree with the person who wrote the link you gave. His first point stumped me for a little while but i got past it eventually (when i wan't thinking about it, my subconscious is just smarter than my conscious).
|
|
|
Post by swimming95 on Jan 28, 2009 16:51:28 GMT -6
I think in theory they are the same
|
|
|
Post by abizarro on Jan 29, 2009 11:32:43 GMT -6
ok, run your (what i hope to be)new reasons by me then.
|
|
|
Post by swimming95 on Jan 29, 2009 17:11:26 GMT -6
don't have a ton of new ones atm. I will post them when I find them
|
|
|
Post by Gooman on Jan 29, 2009 19:36:22 GMT -6
i have the proof 1 equals 2! sq.= squared
A=B.......Multiply by A Asq.=AB......Subtract Bsq. Asq.-Bsq.=AB-Bsq......Factor (A+B)(A-B)=B(A-B)...... Divide by (A-B) A+B=B......Substitute B for A B+B=B......Simplify 2B=B.....Divide by B 2=1
|
|