1

**Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?**

« **on:**March 10, 2007, 03:42:13 PM »

What is 2 x 0.9r? Is it 2?

It is 1.9r8, or some weird thing like that.

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Pages: [**1**] 2

1

What is 2 x 0.9r? Is it 2?

It is 1.9r8, or some weird thing like that.

2

yea 1 is acts like a 'symbol' for .99999999...

lol!

3

It's ok. I heart you. Even though you aren't pretty like me... anyone who will argue hours on end (i know it is an over estimate) about 1 and .9 and whatever... is an OK DOUCHE with me. So long as you don't bother me when i am napping. And so long as you move to canada with the rest of the hippies.And i am sure your friends consider you a first class douche.Those are all different languages though. Hell there's different dialects on English here in Britain. Point whatisname is trying to make is that the Americans rubbished up the language, and dumbed it down.

Exactly. Well ... the actual accepted American English isn't exactly dumbed down, it's just trivially different (civilization instead of civilisation, theater instead of theatre, etc.). Though we do have many retarded slang dialects that are dumbed down entirely; to retarded to be even considered real dialects -- basically how 90% of African Americans talk, and how most hicks talk.

I myself try to use the English English spellings that I know as much I can.

Quite true.

Well ... as Norway doesn't exist now, I suppose Canada seems the next best choice.

4

Yah. but i eat all genres for breakfast. With a side of grapefruit, heavy on the delicious suger. I AM UNLABELABLE!!!

Likewise; but I do metalhead pretty well.

5

I didn't say that at all. I want you to run a search for articles proving that .999...?1 so you'll see that there aren't any.

There aren't any for the simple fact of what I already said above. Read.

6

at some point they stop being artsy and just start looking emo.

Bah, it just looks melancholic!

Metalheads eat emo-kids for breakfast:

7

Yes it does Erebos.

If, as you claim, .999... doesnotequal 1, I'm certain a quick Google search should give a multitude of articles proving it.

Nice job using "the google argument."

"This is the way it is, but I'll not prove it; I'll just tell ye to go to google!"

8

I read the topic, .9r really does = 1 though.

Here, what's 1 - .9r?

Obviously didn't read the topic if you would ask that as a proof against it.

Technically:

1 - .9r ≈ 0

9

Another artsy one.

10

And i am sure your friends consider you a first class douche.Those are all different languages though. Hell there's different dialects on English here in Britain. Point whatisname is trying to make is that the Americans rubbished up the language, and dumbed it down.

Exactly. Well ... the actual accepted American English isn't exactly dumbed down, it's just trivially different (civilization instead of civilisation, theater instead of theatre, etc.). Though we do have many retarded slang dialects that are dumbed down entirely; to retarded to be even considered real dialects -- basically how 90% of African Americans talk, and how most hicks talk.

I myself try to use the English English spellings that I know as much I can.

Quite true.

11

BTW .9r = 1

I love how people pop in, not even reading, and make empty statements against full arguments. Funny.

And no, it doesn't.

12

So what are you saying? That when I take a particle you are composed of and magnify it infinitely Gandalf will appear and magic me back?If you were to take a particle I am composed of and magnify in infinitely, the particles would fill the entire universe, implode into a black hole, and you would be very very small. And dead.

Magnify as in zoom up on, like with a magnifying glass ... not increase in size.

13

Quote

Mathematics exists independently of the world. Mathematical objects havedefinitions. Real numbers are mathematical objects. Decimal representations are just that; a way of representing these mathematical objects.

According tohumanmathematic rules, you are correct. Human existence is separate from reality, as is our system of mathematics. Technically this simply means what I said here:QuoteReally, you are all missing it entirely. Your minds are so narrowed upon human mathematics that you don't see actual reality. Mathematics are numbers and paper, that represent reality approximately. We are not infinite creatures, therefore our mathematics are not infinite; though in some equations we use symbols to represent infinite quantities. These infinite quantities are not actually truly usable in exact math, they would result in no solution in any formula that used them. But, to humans, such a difference does not matter. An infinitely small difference is the same as no difference, to us. We have margins which anything that falls into them is "exact" to us, though technically just approximately exact.

In mathematics, the 0.999... is expressed as 1 because the difference makes no difference. 0.0...1 has no effect on humanity, as it is infinitely small and an infinitely small difference always falls within our margin of error. This does not change reality, just our rational human use of it. Reality is infinite, but humans experience it finitely. Our perceptions are not able to directly experience reality, but do so through filters (our minds and sensory organs) that only picks up finite portions of the infinite reality; this means that our subjective reality is finite, but does not change the actualities of reality (they are simply irrelevant to us, part of a different world entirely separate from us). So, to us, 0.0...1 = 0, because we are finite and such a number has no effect on anything human; it is irrelevant; but in reality, 0.0...1 does exist, and we can reason that it does exist (everything is made up of infinite infinitely small quantities). This means that 0.0...1 does not truly equal 0, just that our only use for it is as a 0. The same is for 0.999, because of the same reason; the difference is so small it makes no difference, so we take it as 1 (but in reality it is not 1, just as close as it can possibly get to being 1; which makes no difference to us).

That reality makes no difference to our reality, so our systems only include that which does. This is thinking contextually, in terms of what mattersto us; but not realistically, in terms of what is actuallyreality. The concept of math transcends the simple rules that humans place upon it; math is not human math, it includes it but is not it. Math is the universal code of representation of reality, and true math is infinite (as reality is infinite in every dimension). Our math is used only to represent what we, as humans, use and perceive; but it just so happens to be able to also (frivolously) represent infinite quantities that mean nothing to us.

What you are doing here is thinking contextually, thinking that these numbers do not matter and do not exist in the context they areused(humanly), therefore translate them into human related concepts (finite numbers). I am thinking in opposition of that, realistically, as the question was in pure form: "Does 1 equal 0.999r?" The pure answer to such a pure question is no, it does not: in reality infinite (and infinitely small) quantities do exist, and what is represented by 0.999r is an infinitely small difference from 1. This answer is the technically correct answer, but not the contextual one. To us, there is no reason to think of 0.999r as anything other than 1; therefore the contextual answer is yes, it does (the reason for this being that it falls within the human margin of "exactness," not because it is reality). The question was pondering upon reality, not human reality.

We are simply showing two sides of the coin, one being human reality (all that matters to us), and the other being actual reality (that which is outside of human scope and context). You are answering the question according to human mathematic rules, I am answering it according to pure math; the math that has no meaning for us, hence is rounded and approximated to form our math. You are absolutely correct in that the human institutions of mathematics accept 1 as the same thing as 0.999r; but if you would care to note, if you asked Einstein ifin reality1 was the same thing as 0.999r, he would answer no (but that it is the same thingto us). The institutions are related only to human dealings, and therefore care not mathematics that do not relate to such.

From another perspective, one that would maybe show some things I have said to be slightly wrong for me to assert (that infinite quantities are not humanly usable) would be that I am speaking from the field ofphilosophy of mathematicswhile you are speaking from the field ofmathematics. The philosophy of something is the field which expands upon the already accepted institutions, so that it may further encompass actual reality. The philosophy of mathematics would bring more and more of reality under the scope of human reality (though never all of it). So, what I say is partially philosophy, in that it comes out of context of human math and attempts to expand the understanding. Of course what I say is no revolution; all genius mathematicians accept it as fact, while the masses, who don't understand concepts such as infinity, will preach that 1 = 0.999r (and this doesn't matter to the mathematicians, as they also know it makes no difference).

Get me?It turns out that .999... and 1 represent the same mathematical object, when you use the actual definitions of decimal representation and real number, instead of some philosophical wishiwashy non-rigorous nonsense definition which you seem to be using.

I ask you again: what are the actual objects that you think "1" and ".999..." represent?

I basically went over this above. But, you are basically correct, except that you bring the concept of all mathematics under the banner of human mathematics; mathematics represents reality, human mathematics represents human reality. In human reality (that which contextually matters to humans) 0.999r = 1, as the infinitely small quantity makesno differencein our reality and henceis nothing(equals zero) to us. In actual reality, it is as I argue. I explained this basically and in more depth above.

As for what actual objects, in our mind 1 equals a single unit of something, or the measuring quantity of something equal to 1 unit of the quantity we've assigned to that unit (foot, meter, kilogram, whatever). You know that..

The one thing I can think of that 0.999r represents is a certain amount of time that does not include the present "moment" (an infinitely small quantity of time). Or 1 unit - 0.0r1.

14

Nonsense. We are not composed of an infinity of nothing; neither are we composed of an infinity of "0.0∞1".

So what are you saying? That when I take a particle you are composed of and magnify it infinitely Gandalf will appear and magic me back? Yes, I know it is impossible to magnify something infinitely; for the same reason 0.999... =/= 1. It doesn't matter, through reasoning and common sense it is quite obvious that there are infinitely small quantities. I can think of one that we all experience constantly -- existence. We exist only in a single moment constantly moving up the ladder of time, that moment is an infinitely small quantity of time. Got it? If that quantity of time did not exist, we would not exist. Quite simple.

The rest of what you said basically made no sense (as it revolved around there being no infinitely small quantity), except that you know more about technical mathematics than me; you surely do, but I know more about common sense and philosophy.

15

Really, you are all missing it entirely. Your minds are so narrowed upon human mathematics that you don't see actual reality. Mathematics are numbers and paper, that represent reality *approximately*. We are not infinite creatures, therefore our mathematics are not infinite; though in some equations we use symbols to represent infinite quantities. These infinite quantities are not actually truly usable in exact math, they would result in no solution in any formula that used them. But, to humans, such a difference does not matter. An infinitely small difference is the same as no difference, *to us*. We have margins which anything that falls into them is "exact" *to us*, though technically just *approximately exact*.

In mathematics, the 0.999... is expressed as 1 because the difference makes no difference. 0.0...1 has no effect on humanity, as it is infinitely small and an infinitely small difference*always* falls within our margin of error. This does not change reality, just our rational human use of it. Reality is infinite, but humans experience it finitely. Our perceptions are not able to directly experience reality, but do so through filters (our minds and sensory organs) that only picks up finite portions of the infinite reality; this means that *our subjective reality* is finite, but does not change the actualities of reality (they are simply irrelevant to us, part of a different world entirely separate from us). So, to us, 0.0...1 = 0, because we are finite and such a number has no effect on anything human; it is irrelevant; but in reality, 0.0...1 does exist, and we can reason that it does exist (everything is made up of infinite infinitely small quantities). This means that 0.0...1 does not truly equal 0, just that our only use for it is as a 0. The same is for 0.999, because of the same reason; the difference is so small it makes no difference, so we take it as 1 (but in reality it is not 1, just as close as it can possibly get to being 1; which makes *no difference to us*).

I've beaten this dead horse to bits. It really isn't so complex. Do you understand yet?

In mathematics, the 0.999... is expressed as 1 because the difference makes no difference. 0.0...1 has no effect on humanity, as it is infinitely small and an infinitely small difference

I've beaten this dead horse to bits. It really isn't so complex. Do you understand yet?

16

Do you think that 0.0?1 = 0?

That number is not possible. You can't have an infinite number of zeros if you put an end to them. By sticking the 1 on the end, you've now got a very, very long string of zeros that ends with a 1, but you do not have infinite zeros.

Nice job completely ignoring the point; and you are wrong. According to mathematic "rules" you are correct (as such a number has no use), but logically you are wrong -- such a number is possible. It is simply the best representation of an infinitely small number; yes, there are infinite zeros, just as there are infinite 9's in 0.999r. According math 0.999r is the same thing as 1, as well, but technically that is false. They are different by an infinitely small number, and that is pivotal. They do not truly equal each other, they simply are as close as anything can come to equaling without equaling.

My point was that everything is made up of infinite infinitely small quantities, and if those infinitely small quantities were zero then nothing exists; this is retarded as things do exist. Therefore the infinitely small quantity is not zero, but is a quantity, the quantity which 0.999r is away from 1.

17

What are your opinions on whether or not humans have free will?

In a sense, I think it's an illusion. I think about it this way: at any time that we are making a decision, our brains have an exact chemical makeup. Based on the stimuli received by our five senses as well as our other cognitive processes operating based on prior experience, memory, etc., I think we are bound to decide whatever we end up deciding in that situation. Even if we think over the decision for a long time, whatever causes us to finalize our decision was taken in by our senses or suddenly realized, which I believe was bound to happen when it did, due to chemical interactions in your brain.

Simply put, given the sameexactsituation twice (hypothetically sent back in time to the exact situation with no memory and the same exact brain chemistry at the time), I believe you would respond identically both times.

In that sense, everything can only happen a single way.

You can choose to toss a coin and go by the choice that the coin shows you. Do you think many creatures could leave their decision up to the toss of a coin? Further more you can choose to make the wrong decision even if you know it is the wrong decision.

This isn't a type of thing that you need to or even should do that about, it just doesn't matter. We should live as we would without any influence by the concept of predetermination or "free will," that is just stupid. The only way I see it as

18

Those are all different languages though. Hell there's different dialects on English here in Britain. Point whatisname is trying to make is that the Americans rubbished up the language, and dumbed it down.

Exactly. Well ... the actual accepted American English isn't exactly dumbed down, it's just trivially different (civilization instead of civilisation, theater instead of theatre, etc.). Though we do have many retarded slang dialects that are dumbed down entirely; to retarded to be even considered real dialects -- basically how 90% of African Americans talk, and how most hicks talk.

I myself try to use the English English spellings that I know as much I can.

19

And then Christopher Columbus had to fucking make people think the world is spherical! Jesus Christ, even the first "American" has to screw with reason. What the hell was wrong with a flat earth? Christ ...

You're completely wrong. Christopher Columbus did not attempt to prove the world round, and did nothing to change people's attitudes towards the shape of the Earth.QuoteFollowing Washington Irving's myth-filled 1828 biography of Columbus, Americans commonly believed Columbus had difficulty obtaining support for his plan because Europeans thought the Earth was flat.[2] In fact, few at the time of Columbus’s voyage, and virtually no sailors or navigators, believed this.[3] Most agreed Earth was a sphere. This had been the general opinion of ancient Greek science, and continued as the standard opinion (for example of Bede in The Reckoning of Time) until Isidore of Seville misread the classical authors and stated the Earth was flat, inventing the T and O map concept. T

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus

You think I was being serious?

20

Ok. I failed to get through with the mathematics, now I'll try to reason.

Are you all denying that infinitely small quantities/numbers exist? Do you think that 0.0∞1 = 0?

I'll assume that is yes, as you think 0.999∞ = 1, and 0.999∞ = 1 - 0.0∞1 (1 = 1 - 0).

So, if you go magnify something infinitely (so that you get to an infinitely small quantity), there is nothing?

This would mean that everything is composed of an infinity of nothing.

If everything is composed of an infinity of nothing, do you realize what that would mean?

I think you'll agree that we are made of*something*, but according to your logic, we are made of an infinity of nothing (which I think you'll agree is nothing).

If 0.999∞ = 1, we don't exist. I don't know about you guys, but I'm quite sure that I exist.

Are you all denying that infinitely small quantities/numbers exist? Do you think that 0.0∞1 = 0?

I'll assume that is yes, as you think 0.999∞ = 1, and 0.999∞ = 1 - 0.0∞1 (1 = 1 - 0).

So, if you go magnify something infinitely (so that you get to an infinitely small quantity), there is nothing?

This would mean that everything is composed of an infinity of nothing.

If everything is composed of an infinity of nothing, do you realize what that would mean?

I think you'll agree that we are made of

If 0.999∞ = 1, we don't exist. I don't know about you guys, but I'm quite sure that I exist.

21

I really don't know enough to demand authority on this, but out of curiosity, couldn't you approximate a number as such: 0.000...1It represents a definite finite quantity minus an infinitely small quantity. It includes the infinitely small quantity.There is no such thing as an infinitely small real number.

Wouldn't that be an infinitely small real number?

~D-Draw

According to his reasoning that would equal zero. In math, that is accepted because it makes no difference, in reality it's retarded to say it is actually true.

22

It represents a definite finite quantity minus an infinitely small quantity. It includes the infinitely small quantity.There is no such thing as an infinitely small real number.

Go figure; did I ever say it was a "real" number?

23

It represents a definite finite quantity minus an infinitely small quantity. It includes the infinitely small quantity.It is an infinite number in the same way that an infinitely small number is an infinite number, and it is the same as if it was an infinite quantity in regards to applying finite mathematics.

But .999... represents neither an infinitely small quantity nor an infinitely large quantity. It represents a definite, finite quantity, and can therefore be treated as such.

Just as 2+2, 8-4, 16÷4, (?4)^2 all represent 4, .999... is just another way of representing 1.

24

I say it doesn't matter. I don't care if my cognition is entirely chemically explainable. It doesn't matter to me, and shouldn't. I live now; it doesn't matter if everything is predetermined by exact structure of atomic particles. I think it is possible we do and possible we don't have free will. I think it is impossible to prove that consciousness is entirely physically based; I also don't think we should care to find out, it simply doesn't matter and. So, basically: don't know, don't care. It is impossible to know if there is material predetermination, though, without being infinite yourself; and if one was infinite then there would not be material predetermination for that one -- so again, doesn't matter. Any hypothesis on the matter will be purely speculation and belief, no evidence or reasoning, as there is nothing to work with.

The only time an argument about free will makes sense is in regards to the Christian concept; which is retarded. (There can't be free will if an omniscient, omnipotent god created the universe.)

The only time an argument about free will makes sense is in regards to the Christian concept; which is retarded. (There can't be free will if an omniscient, omnipotent god created the universe.)

25

Sigh. I'd like to know why the fuck there is an "approximately equal" sign in math, then; because apparently it has no use, now that something not equal to one (but approximately equal) miraculously now "equals" one.

26

You're applying laws of finite math to infinite. There is no concept of "equals" in infinity, that is a finite concept used by finite creatures in a finite science. It doesn't matter if .999? equals anything, such a concept doesn't apply to a number with an infinite aspect; the infinite aspect makes it untouchable by finite mathematics.

Do you think that infinity = infinity?

.999... does not equal infinity. It may be an infinite string of symobols, but it still represents a finite amount. Any special rules that may apply to adding, subtracting, multiplying, or dividing infinity do not apply to a finite amount.

It has an infinite aspect; there are no "special rules" per say, it's basically just mathematic common sense. It is an infinite number in the same way that an infinitely small number is an infinite number, and it is the same as if it was an infinite quantity in regards to applying finite mathematics.

9.999... - .999... simply does not equal 9

It has no solution.

27

AMazing. I just thought... if i was invading from the north... where would i wanna go... to the west... to much forest and crazy mountain folk... to the east... MAINE! and their it was. Dan liberals would prolly great the Canadians as liberators from bush.

Hahaha, they most definitely would. Now enough talking about how

28

Sorry Erebos, you're mistaken:

http://www.cut-the-knot.org/arithmetic/999999.shtml

http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.0.9999.html

http://descmath.com/diag/nines.html

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/math99/math99167.htm

http://qntm.org/pointnine

http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/David.Tall/themes/limits-infinity.html

The repeat the same flawed proof over and over; I'm not wrong.

29

This one goes wrong with the:

10c - c = 9.999? - 0.999?

9c = 9

You simply cant subtract 0.999? from 9.999?. Just as ? - ? ? 0, 9.999? - 0.999? ? 9.

And why not? Surely you must agree that .999... is equal tosomenumber, correct? And that if you subtract that number from .999... you will have 0, correct? And therefore if you subtract that particular number from 9.999... you will have 9. It's the same as subtracting, say, .5 from 2.5. Surely you agree that subtraction would leave 2?

You're applying laws of finite math to infinite. There is no concept of "equals" in infinity, that is a finite concept used by finite creatures in a finite science. It doesn't matter if .999∞ equals anything, such a concept doesn't apply to a number with an infinite aspect; the infinite aspect makes it untouchable by finite mathematics.

Do you think that infinity = infinity?

30

wait a sec... are u really from maine??? Wow. that was just a good guess if u are!

Haha, yes I am really from Maine. :p

That was quite a good guess.

Pages: [**1**] 2