.99999 does not equal 1

  • 856 Replies
  • 100148 Views
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #570 on: September 03, 2008, 12:42:07 PM »
 :o

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #571 on: September 03, 2008, 01:11:17 PM »
So who wins?
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #572 on: September 03, 2008, 01:14:03 PM »

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #573 on: September 03, 2008, 01:25:52 PM »
So who wins?
Another win for FE.

I will write up the theory of Narcberry numbers and submit to the Banach Journal of Mathematical Analysis. Now that we know that there are systems where 0.999... != 1.000..., I am sure there will be emerging applications in engineering and so forth.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #574 on: September 03, 2008, 01:28:32 PM »
I think narcberry is the obvious winner of this thread.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #575 on: September 03, 2008, 01:33:09 PM »
So who wins?
Another win for FE.

I will write up the theory of Narcberry numbers and submit to the Banach Journal of Mathematical Analysis. Now that we know that there are systems where 0.999... != 1.000..., I am sure there will be emerging applications in engineering and so forth.
Since engineering uses only certain amounts of significant figures, any non-terminating decimal is simply rounded.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #576 on: September 03, 2008, 01:40:00 PM »
I think narcberry is the obvious winner of every thread

Fix'd.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #577 on: September 03, 2008, 01:53:54 PM »
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #578 on: September 03, 2008, 02:00:26 PM »
Whether you agree with narc or not, you must admit, he kept this thread going for thirty pages just by posting "No, 1 is still more than 0.9999999..." at intervals and getting other people to argue over it indefinitely. These weren't even noobs he was trolling either; the majority were regulars who know how big of a troll he is and yet fed him anyway.

This is why narc wins and will always win.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #579 on: September 03, 2008, 02:01:43 PM »
This is why narc wins and will always win.

Two words: Floating oceans.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #580 on: September 03, 2008, 02:04:32 PM »
Exactly.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #581 on: September 03, 2008, 04:38:33 PM »
This is why narc wins and will always win.

Two words: Floating oceans.

Epic thread.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #582 on: September 03, 2008, 04:49:04 PM »
Trekky i believe we are the only two in this thread that could have actually seen it while it was being written in.

I loved the 1 rain drop + 1 rain drop = 1 rain drop.

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #583 on: September 03, 2008, 05:12:49 PM »
I agree with the topic title.

.99999 =! 1.
but.
.999... = 1.

That's all.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #584 on: September 03, 2008, 10:22:54 PM »
I agree with the topic title.

.99999 =! 1.
but.
.999... = 1.

That's all.
Yep.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #585 on: September 04, 2008, 09:37:22 AM »
Trekky i believe we are the only two in this thread that could have actually seen it while it was being written in.

I loved the 1 rain drop + 1 rain drop = 1 rain drop.

I remember making diagrams for that thread. ;D

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #586 on: September 04, 2008, 12:34:07 PM »
the 1 cup + 1 cup = 2 cup diagram? I remember reading it.

?

joffenz

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1272
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #587 on: September 04, 2008, 12:54:08 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 2.999...x10^8 m.s?

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #588 on: September 04, 2008, 01:01:45 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 2.999...x10^8 m.s?

Ahah, winner!
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #589 on: September 04, 2008, 01:15:08 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 2.999...x10^8 m.s?
No, but you would surpass it....

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #590 on: September 04, 2008, 05:34:43 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 2.999...x10^8 m.s?
No, but you would surpass it....

What he said.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #591 on: September 04, 2008, 06:01:11 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 299792457.999...m/s?

Is this better?
Mars or Bust

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #592 on: September 04, 2008, 10:26:34 PM »
Could we perhaps attain light speed if we travelled at 2.999...x10^8 m.s?
You mean 299,792,457m/s?

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #593 on: September 04, 2008, 10:50:08 PM »
Lol. I love when a smart comment goes wrong.

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #594 on: September 05, 2008, 03:00:59 AM »
Indeed, 0.9999 does not equal 1 so we have to wonder what this thread is all about.  ;)

If we consider the real question - does 0.999... equal 1 then I have just one thing to say:

If it doesn't, give me the number in between.  :P

Of course, there are 31 pages in this thread and someone may have said this already.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2008, 03:59:15 AM by Daz555 »

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #595 on: September 05, 2008, 06:01:16 AM »
Indeed, 0.9999 does not equal 1 so we have to wonder what this thread is all about.  ;)

If we consider the real question - does 0.999... equal 1 then I have just one thing to say:

If it doesn't, give me the number in between.  :P

Of course, there are 31 pages in this thread and someone may have said this already.

I put it slightly more formally a few pages back.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #596 on: September 05, 2008, 06:31:55 AM »
Indeed, 0.9999 does not equal 1 so we have to wonder what this thread is all about.  ;)

If we consider the real question - does 0.999... equal 1 then I have just one thing to say:

If it doesn't, give me the number in between.  :P

Of course, there are 31 pages in this thread and someone may have said this already.

Well, there's no integer in between 5 and 6 - so are you claiming 5=6?

Why does there have to be a number in between 0.999... and 1? Maybe 1 is right above 0.999...

Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #597 on: September 05, 2008, 06:40:53 AM »
Indeed, 0.9999 does not equal 1 so we have to wonder what this thread is all about.  ;)

If we consider the real question - does 0.999... equal 1 then I have just one thing to say:

If it doesn't, give me the number in between.  :P

Of course, there are 31 pages in this thread and someone may have said this already.

Well, there's no integer in between 5 and 6 - so are you claiming 5=6?

Why does there have to be a number in between 0.999... and 1? Maybe 1 is right above 0.999...

I did not say integer, I said number. However, I take your point and should have been more specific and used the term real number.

?

zeroply

  • 391
  • Flat Earth believer
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #598 on: September 05, 2008, 08:07:05 AM »
Indeed, 0.9999 does not equal 1 so we have to wonder what this thread is all about.  ;)

If we consider the real question - does 0.999... equal 1 then I have just one thing to say:

If it doesn't, give me the number in between.  :P

Of course, there are 31 pages in this thread and someone may have said this already.

Well, there's no integer in between 5 and 6 - so are you claiming 5=6?

Why does there have to be a number in between 0.999... and 1? Maybe 1 is right above 0.999...

I did not say integer, I said number. However, I take your point and should have been more specific and used the term real number.

Well, then you need to prove that between any two real numbers there's a third and distinct one. Obviously your claim works for some types of number systems and not for others, so you need to show it works for the reals in particular. For all I know the reals work just like the integers.

Tread carefully - in the hyperreal numbers for instance the smallest number greater than zero is quite well defined. There is no number between it and 0.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« Reply #599 on: September 05, 2008, 08:43:10 AM »
The real number system, to the best of my knowledge, consists of all points that make up the number line. Since a line is continuous and infinite, the interval joining any two distinct points on it must be able to be bisected to give a number in between, and therefore any two distinct real numbers must have another real number between them.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.