[QUOTE=Collin665;35293156]I'm confused why people are rating the OP dumb.
Do they not like ViHart? Or do they not understand the concept and think its wrong? Or do they just think the concept is overdone and they realize that its true?
I thought it was pretty cool even though I am familiar with twin representations.
Explain please.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how .99 repeating can possibly even exist anyways if it repeats 'infinity', thus it would instantly equals one
I don't see any point in trying to prove it doesn't either, .99... doesn't exist and can't unless it actually ends
Unless I'm somehow missing something?
her voice
that slight "crunching" of the s's and the sh's and the ch's
ughhhh
[editline]25th March 2012[/editline]
pretty neat video though i like the drawings
[QUOTE=J!NX;35293266]I don't see how .99 repeating can possibly even exist anyways if it repeats 'infinity', thus it would instantly equals one
I don't see any point in trying to prove it doesn't either, .99... doesn't exist and can't unless it actually ends
Unless I'm somehow missing something?[/QUOTE]
Ugh, so you're saying .333... Doesn't exist?
-snip-
[QUOTE=J!NX;35293266]I don't see how .99 repeating can possibly even exist anyways if it repeats 'infinity', thus it would instantly equals one
I don't see any point in trying to prove it doesn't either, .99... doesn't exist and can't unless it actually ends
Unless I'm somehow missing something?[/QUOTE]
Well, that is the point. They're just different representations, 'twin representations', of the same number.
If I write the value 2.4999 (9 repeating), that is a valid and existent numerical representation. It represents the same value that 2.5 represents.
There are people who don't understand that. Some people think that 0.999... is somehow a separate, unique number that is infinitely close to 1, but not 1.
But there are numbers that are infinitely long (pi for example!) and there are even crazier numbers that we still use for real life applications. Vi briefly talks about these at the end: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-octonion[/url]
[QUOTE=Smashmaster;35293341]Ugh, so you're saying .333... Doesn't exist?[/QUOTE]
I must be missing something
I meant .999 would instantly equate to 1 due to rounding, .333... is different I guess
[QUOTE=Collin665;35293357]Well, that is the point. They're just different representations, 'twin representations', of the same number.
There are people who don't understand that. Some people think that it somehow is a separate, unique number that is somehow infinitely close to 1, but not 1.
But there are numbers that are infinitely long (pi for example!) and there are even crazier numbers that we still use for real life applications. Vi briefly talks about these at the end: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split-octonion[/url][/QUOTE]
I don't even like/am good at math so what am I doing here trying to make a point :v:
I just go with rounding to the nearest number, .33... as an actual fraction makes sense to me (1/3) and .99... wouldn't make sense to me
[QUOTE=J!NX;35293266]I don't see how .99 repeating can possibly even exist anyways if it repeats 'infinity', thus it would instantly equals one
I don't see any point in trying to prove it doesn't either, .99... doesn't exist and can't unless it actually ends
Unless I'm somehow missing something?[/QUOTE]
think of it like this
3(1/3) = 1 = .333... + .333... + .333... = .999... = 1
[editline]25th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=J!NX;35293359]I must be missing something
I meant .999 would instantly equate to 1 due to rounding, .333... is different I guess[/QUOTE]
it's not rounding, it's [I]being[/I]
it's the same reason that 5 + 5 = 10. they are the same thing mathematically.
you're basically saying "why have the number 2 when we can just write it as the cube root of eight?"
0.3 repeating isn't 1/3. It's a decimal APPROXIMATION of 1/3 which means it isn't the exact value (of 1/3). 0.3333 to the infinity * 3 is not the same as 1/3 * 3. One is a multiplication using absolute values while the other is an approximation. They're two different numbers.
Either that or I'm just too stupid enough to understand why 0.9 repeating is the same as 1.
[QUOTE=Collin665;35293357]Well, that is the point. They're just different representations, 'twin representations', of the same number.[/QUOTE]
They're different numbers, it's just that one is only possible (to measure, at least) in theory.
0.999... = 1 is true in the same way that 0.000... = 0.
It just doesn't look that way because your brain goes:
.9 =/= 1
.99 =/= 1
.999 =/= 1
.9999 =/= 1
So it would intuitively follow that no matter how many nines you put, it will never equal 1. The problem is that when you put an infinite number of nines, it equals 1.
The people that rate OP dumb have never taken higher level math classes.
[QUOTE=Smashmaster;35293456]0.999... = 1 is true in the same way that 0.000... = 0.
It just doesn't look that way because your brain goes:
.9 =/= 1
.99 =/= 1
.999 =/= 1
.9999 =/= 1
So it would intuitively follow that no matter how many nines you put, it will never equal 1. [b]The problem is that when you put an infinite number of nines, it equals 1.[/b][/QUOTE]
I would like to see an actual proof of this.
[QUOTE=Paramud;35293422]They're different numbers, it's just that one is only possible (to measure, at least) in theory.[/QUOTE]
No, they're the same number. They are both 1. 1 can be measured, and exists. Therefore both exist, and can be measured.
[QUOTE=Plastical;35293418]0.3 repeating isn't 1/3. It's a decimal APPROXIMATION of 1/3 which means it isn't the exact value (of 1/3). 0.3333 to the infinity * 3 is not the same as 1/3 * 3. One is a multiplication using absolute values while the other is an approximation. They're two different numbers.
Either that or I'm just too stupid enough to understand why 0.9 repeating is the same as 1.[/QUOTE]
it's the second choice i'm afraid :(
[QUOTE=Plastical;35293522]I would like to see an actual proof of this.[/QUOTE]
Jesus, fine. But if you can't understand the math behind the proof, you aren't allowed to rebut it.
Here's my white-board ghetto-proof.
[img]http://i43.tinypic.com/34ougkl.jpg[/img]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_analysis[/url]
Go read it and stop claiming 0.9999.. = 1 ; If u keep doing it, I will hold u accountable the next time a bridge collapses.
[QUOTE=Gutsani;35293665][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_analysis[/url]
Go read it and stop claiming 0.9999.. = 1 ; If u keep doing it, I will hold u accountable the next time a bridge collapses.[/QUOTE]
You make the mistake of assuming that 0.999... is an approximation. It is not. It is exact. It is exactly 1.
I wish I was better at math.
[QUOTE=Smashmaster;35293643]Jesus, fine. But if you can't understand the math behind the proof, you aren't allowed to rebut it.
Here's my white-board ghetto-proof.
[img]http://i43.tinypic.com/34ougkl.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
You can also use this to show that limit 'n' tends to zero, for 0.00000000........1 = 0
Convergence on zero.
[QUOTE=Smashmaster;35293682]You make the mistake of assuming that 0.999... is an approximation. It is not. It is exact. It is exactly 1.[/QUOTE]
Touché - my point is wrong
People simply shouldnt claim that 1/3 * 3 = 0.9999.. - its not
corrected because I'm an idiot and put numbers where numbers should not have been
0.333... = 1/3
0.333... + 0.333... + 0.333... = 0.999...
0.999... = 3/3
0.999... = 1
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;35293721]3.333... = 1/3
3.333... x 3.333... = 9.999...
9.999... = 3/3
9.999... = 1
I'm not great at maths, but that's what someone told me on YouTube, so there we go.[/QUOTE]
Besides being late, 3.333... =/= 1/3
0.333... = 1/3
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;35293721]3.333... = 1/3 - WRONG
3.333... x 3.333... = 9.999... - WRONG
9.999... = 3/3 - WRONG
9.999... = 1 - WRONG
I'm not great at maths, but that's what someone told me on YouTube, so there we go.[/QUOTE]
Good job being wrong 4 times in a single post. U just failed math.
[QUOTE=Smashmaster;35293643]Jesus, fine. But if you can't understand the math behind the proof, you aren't allowed to rebut it.
Here's my white-board ghetto-proof.
[img]http://i43.tinypic.com/34ougkl.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
If I were to solve this in a math test by saying that the limit of 10^n as n approaches -infinity, I would agree with you by saying that the answer infinitely approaches 0, hence the (1 - 0 = 1). However, the problem with the limit method is that it is an approximation of the answer for whatever value of n it is approaching. If I were to use a simple algebraic method, this wouldn't hold.
[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;35293721]3.333... = 1/3
3.333... x 3.333... = 9.999...
9.999... = 3/3
9.999... = 1
I'm not great at maths, but that's what someone told me on YouTube, so there we go.[/QUOTE]
3.333... * 3.333... is actually somewhere around 11.1099999~
[QUOTE=Watevaman;35293458]The people that rate OP dumb have never taken higher level math classes.[/QUOTE]
I rated it dumb because it was dumb, and because this thread and threads like it have been made way too many times, not because I disagreed with the fact that 0.99... = 1.
[QUOTE=Plastical;35293774]If I were to use a simple algebraic method, this wouldn't hold.[/QUOTE]
So do it.
[QUOTE=Collin665;35293156]I'm confused why people are rating the OP dumb.[/QUOTE]
because every other thread regarding this topic that has been posted on fp did not end well
[editline]25th March 2012[/editline]
as summed up in the first post:
[QUOTE=DarkWolf2;35292182]Oh god, not this shit again.[/QUOTE]
Isn't the only reason people still dont understand this because they dont understand infinity? If the number of nines is just insanely super mega high, 1 does not equal it, but with infinite nines, 1 does. It's just that people think that infinity is just a really long number, that does end, that can be treated just like other numbers...
I bet that girls vagina is oozing smegma.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
