If 0.999...=1 then does 1.888...=2?

[Cole]

This is also how Half-Life works!
First half of it goes then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that then half of that and that goes on forever basically.

 

[bbson john]

I don't really know why I just read the entire thread and wanted to post only this, but here goes. The Tortoise example reminded me of it.

Let's assume a simple bow and arrow. Before the arrow can reach the bulls-eye, it must reach the point in space directly halfway between the starting point (bow) and ending point (target). before it can reach that halfway point, it must reach the halfway point of the first and the starting, or the overall quarter point from the bow and the target. Keep going, and logically, the arrow can never reach the target, but it still does.

How this relates to .999... = 1, I have no damn clue, I just wanted to throw it into the hellpit.

.999... = 1

This statement missed a critical factor: Time. The statement miserably assumed it always takes the same amount of time for the arrow to achieve different halves of the path. In reality, of course it doesn't. My point is whenever the arrow achieve the next half of the current path, it takes less time as well. More halves, less time. So when it heads to an extremely insignificant lenght, you take an extremely insignificant period of time to finish the halves of the path. The arrow won't need extra time to finish the every half of the path. Hence, it will be able to reach the target with a short, normal amount of time. In marco-view, it doesn't look like it passes through infinite halves of the way, but it does.

In short, 1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16...=1

To do this, Let 1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16... be y
Such that, 1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16 = y
1/2+1/2(1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16...) = y
1/2+1/2 = y
2(1/2+1/2) = 2
1+y = 2
y=1

1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16...=1

But in the case of .999... and 1, there is no space between them.

If 0.999... and 1 are distinct numbers and of no space between them. What is (0.999...+1)/2?

 

[JellyWorld]

But in the case of .999... and 1, there is no space between them.

There is no such thing as two different numbers with no space between them. If there is no difference between two numbers, then it's the same number.

 

[Steven]

Neil Diamond.

 

[Raxxman]

actually the arrow example, like the tortoise is there to show a flaw in math logic. It shows that if you look at a relatively simple problem in the wrong light you come up with the wrong conclusion. It's supposed to teach you to take a step back and make sure you're going about answering the question the right way. (Well at least that's what it does for me.)

People struggle with .9 recurring because they think eventually you'll reach the end, it's hard to fathom infinity. .9 recurring goes on forever and ever and ever and ever ever. If you look down the line you see 9's and if you step back from the number and look at the math you'll see its the same.

 

[JellyWorld]

It's not a flaw in math logic, it's a flaw in people's intuitive notion of infinity.

 

[bbson john]

actually the arrow example, like the tortoise is there to show a flaw in math logic. It shows that if you look at a relatively simple problem in the wrong light you come up with the wrong conclusion. It's supposed to teach you to take a step back and make sure you're going about answering the question the right way. (Well at least that's what it does for me.)

People struggle with .9 recurring because they think eventually you'll reach the end, it's hard to fathom infinity. .9 recurring goes on forever and ever and ever and ever ever. If you look down the line you see 9's and if you step back from the number and look at the math you'll see its the same.

If you really calculate them in maths, you will find that all these paradoxes are neither a paradox, nor paradoxical. These trivia can never reveal the flaw of Maths. (I've done both the calculation and words-explain to "break" the arrow paradox in my previous reply. It is easy to spot the misstatement of those paradoxes since they are very old, most likely firstly published in ancient Greece.)

 

[Insano]

This is also how Half-Life works!
First half of it goes then half of that then half of that ... and that goes on forever basically.

It does not go on forever.

Radioactivity are just instable atoms sending out radiation (alpha, beta + or -, gamma) to lose energy and to become more stable. You can't say exactly when you're looking at an individual atom when it's going to send out radiation (they say "fall" in Dutch, I don't know how to say it scientifically in English).

But when take a large amount of the same kind of instable atoms, you can judge when half of them are going to have sent out their radiation. This is what's called the half-life.

But they are not going to send out radiation forever. At one point, the amount that stays behind will be near the atom level and eventually they will all be gone.

 

[bbson john]

It does not go on forever.

Radioactivity are just instable atoms sending out radiation (alpha, beta + or -, gamma) to lose energy and to become more stable. You can't say exactly when you're looking at an individual atom when it's going to send out radiation (they say "fall" in Dutch, I don't know how to say it scientifically in English).

But when take a large amount of the same kind of instable atoms, you can judge when half of them are going to have sent out their radiation. This is what's called the half-life.

But they are not going to send out radiation forever. At one point, the amount that stays behind will be near the atom level and eventually they will all be gone.

"fall" = decay?

Okay, this reminds me of Schrödinger's Cat. I am always fascinated by the uncertainty in quantum measurement. Schrödinger's Cat is one of the greatest paradox in the Physics world. In short, a cat is put into a closed box. Within the box, there are the cat, a bottle of poison and a radio-decay detecting device. A radioactive atom, which will decay, is put into the device. The device will release the poison and kill the cat if it finds that the atom decayed. So after a half-life of the atom, what is the situation inside the box? Did the cat die? Did it not? Answer: half-dead (before observation)

 

[Insano]

"fall" = decay?

Okay, this reminds me of Schrödinger's Cat. I am always fascinated by the uncertainty in quantum measurement. Schrödinger's Cat is one of the greatest paradox in the Physics world. In short, a cat is put into a closed box. Within the box, there are the cat, a bottle of poison and a radio-decay detecting device. A radioactive atom, which will decay, is put into the device. The device will release the poison and kill the cat if it finds that the atom decayed. So after a half-life of the atom, what is the situation inside the box? Did the cat die? Did it not? Answer: half-dead (before observation)

Jep, I meant decay

And an interesting experiment. But there is no way of telling if it died or not. The atom could as well decay hundreds of years later.

 

[bbson john]

Jep, I meant decay

And an interesting experiment. But there is no way of telling if it died or not. The atom could as well decay hundreds of years later.

Or it decayed.

Here comes to probability. God rolls dice. Einstein's wrong.

 

[Raxxman]

Um I wasn't saying its a paradox, I'm just saying using that mathamatical progression you will not get an answer as you progressively get smaller and smaller gaps between measurement.

for the tortoise example:
100 + 10 + 1 + 0.1 +0.01 +0.001, etc

sure you can do different math, say vectors, and actually gain an answer, but the point wasn't that its a flaw in math, but rather a miss use of math. To rubbish that point by using different math only proves it

 

[Solaris]

Or it decayed.

Here comes to probability. God rolls dice. Einstein's wrong.

I'm siding with Einsteinm, I hate the concept of random chance.

 

[bbson john]

I'm siding with Einsteinm, I hate the concept of random chance.

However, the fact is everything is random. Note that uncertainty determine our free will. If you believe in Einstein, you must except the concept of determinism. We are a machine therefore.

 

[Raxxman]

no cause, no effect, history is written and so is the future.

 

[Cole]

It does not go on forever.

Radioactivity are just instable atoms sending out radiation (alpha, beta + or -, gamma) to lose energy and to become more stable. You can't say exactly when you're looking at an individual atom when it's going to send out radiation (they say "fall" in Dutch, I don't know how to say it scientifically in English).

But when take a large amount of the same kind of instable atoms, you can judge when half of them are going to have sent out their radiation. This is what's called the half-life.

But they are not going to send out radiation forever. At one point, the amount that stays behind will be near the atom level and eventually they will all be gone.

leave me alone ahahahahahahahahahahahah


I do not believe in Random. Everything is a reaction to something else. That is what I believe. I believe that if you have some dice and you role it on the ground and it lands on 5 is not random. That dice is being affected by different forces. The angle at which it hit the ground, the friction it had with the object, gravity, etc.. every single law is acting on it. I believe that it did not land on 5 because of chance. It landed on five because of every single force acting upon it including yourself. I believe that in a controlled enviroment if you could throw some dice with the exact same force, same height, same everything and it will land in the same way every time.

 

[secret friend]

infinitely small means zero. Hence, 1- 0.99999999999999999999999999.... = zero, which means the two are the same.

 

[TheSomeone]

If 0.999... and 1 are distinct numbers and of no space between them. What is (0.999...+1)/2?

There is no such thing as two different numbers with no space between them. If there is no difference between two numbers, then it's the same number.

In case you douchebags have not yet determined this:
I WAS THE VERY FIRST FUKIN PERSON TO CLAIM 0.999... AND 1 WERE EQUAL IN THIS WORTHLESS FORUM, I MADE THAT FIRST INFAMOUS THREAD THAT PISSED OFF EVERYONE ABOUT A YEAR AGO.


For chrissake.

 

[Solaris]

I do not believe in Random. Everything is a reaction to something else. That is what I believe. I believe that if you have some dice and you role it on the ground and it lands on 5 is not random. That dice is being affected by different forces. The angle at which it hit the ground, the friction it had with the object, gravity, etc.. every single law is acting on it. I believe that it did not land on 5 because of chance. It landed on five because of every single force acting upon it including yourself. I believe that in a controlled enviroment if you could throw some dice with the exact same force, same height, same everything and it will land in the same way every time.

Anyone who doesn't belive the dice part is an idiot.

 

[99.vikram]

I do not believe in Random. Everything is a reaction to something else. That is what I believe. I believe that if you have some dice and you role it on the ground and it lands on 5 is not random. That dice is being affected by different forces. The angle at which it hit the ground, the friction it had with the object, gravity, etc.. every single law is acting on it. I believe that it did not land on 5 because of chance.

Then you don't believe in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (which also applies to the dice)?

Also; there IS a difference betn. 0.99... and 1, the difference being infinitesimally small.

In calculus when we use 'dx' it means an infinitesimally small differential element. But dx=/=0.

 

[TheSomeone]

Then you don't believe in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (which also applies to the dice)?

Also; there IS a difference betn. 0.99... and 1, the difference being infinitesimally small.

In calculus when we use 'dx' it means an infinitesimally small differential element. But dx=/=0.

The difference between 1 and .999... is not dx but 0.
If you are in calc you should hopefully understand this proof:

0.9999... = 1

Thus x = 0.9999...
10x = 9.9999...
10x - x = 9.9999... - 0.9999...
9x = 9
x = 1.

 

[Solaris]

Then you don't believe in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (which also applies to the dice)?

It doesn't apply to the dice.

 

[Remus]

0.9999... = 1

Thus x = 0.9999...
10x = 9.9999...
10x - x = 9.9999... - 0.9999...
9x = 9
x = 1.

:O This is extremely weird shit.

Just one thing though

9x = 9 right? but x = 0.9999... well then if you do the calculation 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991 !!!!

However the demonstration you did does seem to be correct so how is this possible?!
So according to this 0.9999.... = 1 but 1=/= 0.9999.... My head hurts

 

[Solaris]

:O This is extremely weird shit.

Just one thing though

9x = 9 right? but x = 0.9999... well then if you do the calculation 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991 !!!!

However the demonstration you did does seem to be correct so how is this possible?!
So according to this 0.9999.... = 1 but 1=/= 0.9999.... My head hurts

You're wrong and you owe everyone who thought you were wrong an apology.

 

[Remus]

You're wrong and you owe everyone who thought you were wrong an apology.

I never apologize, not even to those I care about so...

Am I wrong with this? 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

 

[Solaris]

I never a apologize, not even to those I care about so...

Am I wrong with this? 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

yes, you are again wrong. 9x 0.999... = 9

You said "Get it into your thick skulls" when you thought what we were saying was wrong. You now admit you are wrong? Or at least have yet to proove you are right, yet you refuse to withdraw your insult at everyone who was right.

You're a complete prick.

 

[Remus]

yes, you are again wrong. 9x 0.999... = 9

Oh brother, I mean 9 times 0.999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

and yes it is correct, just use a calculator if you don't believe me

You're a complete prick.

Why thank you.

 

[Solaris]

Oh brother, I mean 9 times 0.999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

and yes it is correct, just use a calculator if you don't believe mep

It's not.
0.999...=1
So n x 0.999.... = n

Why thank you.

Do you have any real life freinds?

 

[TheSomeone]

I never apologize, not even to those I care about so...

Am I wrong with this? 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

A one at the end of a number that has no end?

Yes, you're wrong.

IN any case, the multiplication I did in my proof was 10 x 0.9999.... all you do is shift the decimal point.

 

[Raxxman]

redneck you have learn to understand that your calculator is wrong.

 

[Remus]

redneck you have learn to understand that your calculator is wrong.

I "have learn" the trooth:O

Never mind. I'll keep believing that I'm right and you'll keep believing that your right. I'll just let you debate this until you get bored and I'll stop bothering you all. How's that?

 

[EC]

I never apologize, not even to those I care about so...

Am I wrong with this? 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

How do you plan to get to that last 1, if there is an infinite number of 9s in front of it?

I challenge anyone to try to subtract the smallest number they can from 1 to get 0.999... (not including 1/∞ [is that even a "real" number?]) and I bet I can subtract a smaller number, in which someone else can subtract an even smaller number.

 

[Insano]

leave me alone ahahahahahahahahahahahah


I do not believe in Random. Everything is a reaction to something else. That is what I believe. I believe that if you have some dice and you role it on the ground and it lands on 5 is not random. That dice is being affected by different forces. The angle at which it hit the ground, the friction it had with the object, gravity, etc.. every single law is acting on it. I believe that it did not land on 5 because of chance. It landed on five because of every single force acting upon it including yourself. I believe that in a controlled enviroment if you could throw some dice with the exact same force, same height, same everything and it will land in the same way every time.

I didn't say that everything is random

What I did say was that you can't just determine when an atom is going to decay. You can however calculate when half of a large portion of them will be decayed.

And I was just responding to Minerel's post that half-life goes on forever.

 

[secret friend]

is 1.00000000000000000 with a 1 at infinity = 1????

 

[TheSomeone]

is 1.00000000000000000 with a 1 at infinity = 1????

Yes because the one will never be reached because there are an infinte amountn of 0.

 

[secret friend]

Yes because the one will never be reached because there are an infinte amountn of 0.

so 1.0000000000000000000000 with 7 at infinity is also equal to 1?

 

[TheSomeone]

so 1.0000000000000000000000 with 7 at infinity is also equal to 1?

Obviously

 

[Ikerous]

so 1.0000000000000000000000 with 7 at infinity is also equal to 1?

C.000...N = C

where C and N are both integers

 

[Yuri]

I never apologize, not even to those I care about so...

Am I wrong with this? 9 x 0.9999... = 8.99999....n.....99991

Yes, you are wrong with that. The whole concept of infinity means that the repeating decimal never ends. So putting a 1 at the "end" makes no sense whatsoever. You can't just put a 1 at the "end" of a number that repeats into infinity, because it has no end. It repeats into infinity.

There is no 8.999...9991. That does not make sense.

You can be a cock about it if you really must, but you can't say "We can agree to disagree" because it was just mathmatically proven in this thread about ten friggin' times that .999... = 1. You have no proof nor no ground to stand on. When you take calculus, remember the proof that I quoted earlier in this thread to see how it is proven that .999... = 1.

C.000...N = C

where C and N are both integers

I don't mean to question you, Ikerous, because you obviously know math a lot better than me, but isn't that impossible...?

 

[secret friend]

the difference would be infinitely small. In other words, zero. Hence the two numbers are the same.

If A-B = 0 then A = B