326 replies to this topic

[protoman no one]

so............i was right? i will quote a part of tom apostol?s book "calculus" here ...........
why you don?t solve the question: who was first, chiken or egg???
in my opinion, 0.999999...............99999999........ is not equal to 1, but this point is justified by the real number axiomatic.....
have a nice day
protoman no one

[TyYann]

why you don?t solve the question: who was first, chiken or egg???

Biology gave the answer long time ago. But it is not the topic here...

[vanhoa]

Nothing can make me say 1<>0.999999... With my knowledge I can say 1=0.999999... is true.

[kucalc]

why you don?t solve the question: who was first, chiken or egg???

Neither, learn about evolution and the gradual process that brought diversity of life.

in my opinion, 0.999999...............99999999........ is not equal to 1, but this point is justified by the real number axiomatic.....
have a nice day
protoman no one

How can I have a nice day when someone doesn't believe that 0.9999.... equals 1? In fact you ruined my day, but brought me a great idea. You know what, I'm going to start an mathematical organization that will finally declare once and for all that 0.9999... equals 1. This may happen or it may not... If I do this, who will join me?

[vanhoa]

Sorry if I am spam. But there are more question:

• Who are we?
• Where are we? Where did we come from?
• Why do we live?

[Orwell]

Sorry, you wrong.

Yeah, that was a constructive answer

[kucalc]

Sorry if I am spam. But there are more question:

• Who are we?
• Where are we? Where did we come from?
• Why do we live?

What are you talking about? Are you talking about evolution? If so I'm sorry to bring up that topic...

[vanhoa]

St that human havent know yet

[protoman no one]

we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood..............join our brotherhood, join our brotherhood!!!!! join kucalc.......join kucalc......join us....join us (sugestive message)

i was only joking with my question of the chicken, but i have a theory, if evolution was succed really as we know, it could be taked (sorry, my english is in experimental phase ) more time that we estimated. so we only can speak about microevolution in species........the macroevolution can not be proved. it?s the same point when you trying to probe god?s existence....you can?t....but it is only my opinion. if i hurted somebody with my coments, please excuse me
errrr.........bye
protoman no one

sorry for the brain-cleaner message , i will not follow you
and there is another question, why chicken crossed the road??????

[kucalc]

we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood, we will join you, we are a brotherhood..............join our brotherhood, join our brotherhood!!!!! join kucalc.......join kucalc......join us....join us (sugestive message)

LOL

sorry for the brain-cleaner message , i will not follow you

What a put-down. You had my hopes up... It seems you ruined another day for me.

and there is another question, why chicken crossed the road??????

Why would a chicken cross a road? I thought domestic chickens were kept in farms.

- "Knock, Knock"
- You reply: "Who's there?"
- You look and it's the chicken!

Obviously the chicken crossed the road to get to your house where you live in fairy tale land. Hahahaha! Oh, wait I just realized that joke was lame....

[protoman no one]

i hope somebody will follow you, kucalc........., but i will be there to stop you world domination plans!!!
and......errr..cofff cofff.....sorry, that flu is horrible (i?m kidding) .
i will use my super-duper computer (mark 2) to probe that 0.9999999..........<>1
why you don?t join me? ......join me.....join me......the math.....join it.....join it...follow us....(another sugestive message)
see you later
protoman no one

[kucalc]

Would you want to take a look at my website? http://kucalc.frih.net

i will use my super-duper computer (mark 2) to probe that 0.9999999..........<>1
why you don?t join me? ......join me.....join me......the math.....join it.....join it...follow us....(another sugestive message)

OK, let's get serious now.

protoman, why don't you show us some math that shows 0.99999... does not equal 1? I don't think I have seen any math that disproves 0.9999... equals 1. How come? There's a lot of math showing that 0.9999.... equals 1. If 0.9999... does not equal 1, surely there should be a mathematical procedure to show this to be true? If you can't back your ideas with concrete facts, then what is your point in arguing? Are you saying that mathematics is wrong itself? 2+2 does not equal 4? 0.9999... does not equal 1? Show me the mathematics!!! Show me an example in math that 0.999.... does not equal one! Show me a proof! (Don't just say 0.9999....<>1!)

Thus, if you can't show that it is false mathematically, then it must be true mathematically.

[TyYann]

Thus, if you can't show that it is false mathematically, then it must be true mathematically.

No. it might be true. Mathematically it is a "We don't know".
Anyways, I agree with the rest of your post. If 0.999... =/= 1, I want a mathematical proof. Something solid, not some vague considerations about infinity. A real demonstration.

[protoman no one]

ok, i will probe. can i submit a pdf or a word document to the forum? because i can?t print math symbols here......
don?t be angry kucalc (or the correct word is hungry? i can?t remember,excuse my english),
be serious, ok i will............
protoman no one

[kucalc]

Anyways, I agree with the rest of your post. If 0.999... =/= 1, I want a mathematical proof. Something solid, not some vague considerations about infinity. A real demonstration.

Exactly!

ok, i will probe. can i submit a pdf or a word document to the forum? because i can?t print math symbols here......
don?t be angry kucalc (or the correct word is hungry? i can?t remember,excuse my english),
be serious, ok i will............
protoman no one

If you want protoman, you can submit your file to my site at: http://kucalc.frih.net
Place the file under the Misc section.

[muelsaco]

Hello everybody!

I'm french, so sorry for my bad english...

I have a comment on that topic:
The expression 0.9999... is false.
If you want to pose correctly the problem we say that 0.999... is the sum of k=1 to k=n of 9.10^-k
=9.10^-1*(1-10^(-n-1))/(1-10^-1)=1-10^(-n-1)
When n-->+infinite, the sum=1.

[TyYann]

Je suis d'accord avec ta preuve, mais je ne consid?re pas que 0.999... soit incorrect. C'est une convention d'?criture comme une autre et reconnue.

I agree with your proof, but I don't consider 0.999... being incorrect. It's a writing convention like any other and recognized.

[muelsaco]

You have already seen 0.999... in university?? (in high school they don't respect convention)
We can write (0,1,...10) 0.999...9 but we can't write 0.999...

ps:TyYann tu es fran?ais?

[huhn_m]

hm muelsaco ... but you can write 0.999 with a bar above the last 9 meaning that it is repeated indefinately (sp?)

(btw. I change my opinion. I agree that 0.999... is 1. There is too much proof (most convincing beeing the definition of real numbers)

[muelsaco]

0.999... is understandable but I think (I'm not sure) that the expression is incorrect...
I have to ask my mathematics' professor

[kucalc]

ok, i will probe. can i submit a pdf or a word document to the forum? because i can?t print math symbols here......
don?t be angry kucalc (or the correct word is hungry? i can?t remember,excuse my english),
be serious, ok i will............
protoman no one

If you want protoman, you can submit your file to my site at: http://kucalc.frih.net
Place the file under the Misc section.

protoman, where have you gone? Why are you so quiet now? Where's the mathematical proof that shows 0.999.... does not equal 1? I told you already, you can upload it to my site.

[TyYann]

You have already seen 0.999... in university??
ps:TyYann tu es fran?ais?

Yes, I've seen that in university. And I find university less obsessed with rules than high school, as long as they stay clear, they don't bother too much : they emphasis the spirit where in high school they emphasis conventions.

And Oui, je suis fran?ais.

[muelsaco]

Yes, I've seen that in university. And I fint university less obsessed with rules than high school, as long as they stay clear, they don't bother too much : they emphasis the spirit where in high school they emphasis conventions.

It's the contrary for me So you are lucky

[2072]

I've seen it at the University too

[protoman no one]

for kucalc and everybody: i?m not gone, man!!!!
i?m studiying for my exams, so i?m sorry for the late!
i have not a "really, really" probe (i will explain why later), but i have some math comments about real number decimal representation ( and definition of it) that says i?m right (they were made by an expert and i think that is right) so i will sent a copy to the forum (if administrators give me permission) and to your homepage, but you must wait, i?m bussy.
please understand me, i?m really bussy now
see you later
protoman no one
if you saw it at university, i saw it at highschool
bye
and.....i forget something: you must ask betoe for a translation, because my english level is bad, so i will write it in spanish.

[huhn_m]

Hm ... then show us this proof as soon as you have time.

But I'm sure you didn't hear about the definition of real numbers at highschool. As far as I remember then if you define x.9999 as x+1 you do essentially disprove the definition of real numbers. Do you really think that your knowledge you got in high-school is good enough for this?

(btw ... if you're american your high schools do aren't really the standard of education. A friend of mine is in the US for a year. He got a 3-4 (grade C-D) in germany in maths and now he is in the US, took the most difficult maths course offered and still is among the best of the year ... (just as a comment))

[protoman no one]

i don?t know what you think or mean, but is your opinion, that?s right. i don?t care about american methods or others , because i studied for myself (of course, i studied and graduated from higschool, i am not a genie ). if you are saying that i am a kind of fool, you are wrong . i think that nobody is the owner of the truth . i?m just trying to probe that . i am talking about that 0.99999...=1 and people who said that it is a kind of universal truth.
my intention is not to get you or others with me (i used icon because i can?t remember the word that means when you get furious).
so, be patient with me, i will sent this probe later, when i finish my exams.
have a nice day.
protoman no one

[TyYann]

All you said has been answered in previous pages...

And by the way, pi, e, and even 0, 1 etc. are also concepts.
I WILL continue to write equations with infinity as a variable, as long as I define what I am talking about.

[vanhoa]

Nowadays, math is a powerful subject of human. But everythings is not good at all. Math is also being true and false somwwhere inside it. There are many thing to update for it... We can understaind math not well as we think, but, every thing will change if you can prove it, we can build our future as we want... But, when saying something is wrong you must think careful about what you want to change, many mathematic define it, if you think they are wrong all...

AND, INFINITI NUMBER ARE DEFINED VERY WELL NOW, TO SAY IT IS WRONG, YOU MUST GIVE THE REASON!

--Sorry, my English isnt very well

[GTMP]

As my thinking that, 1 is a universal number & starts as unit. if we devide this unit with 10^10 then this result is nver be countable physically. So, .99999999999999999999........ (i.e, upto 100 decimal) is as good as 1. I hope that this type of question is nothing but a funny question.

[huhn_m]

well, actually it can be counted. ANY number that is real can be counted. This is the definition of real numbers. And any periodic number is writeable as a fraction. And fractions are, by definition countable set. ( http://de.wikipedia....i/Bruchrechnung )

[kucalc]

ok, i will probe. can i submit a pdf or a word document to the forum? because i can?t print math symbols here......
don?t be angry kucalc (or the correct word is hungry? i can?t remember,excuse my english),
be serious, ok i will............
protoman no one

I've been waiting for a month now...

[protoman no one]

sorry for the late......happy new year for all members(once again, sorry for the laaaate)!
well, i said that i will send a "probe", so now i will send. the document will be in spanish (because my english is in performing mode), so the people who want a traduction must ask betoe or another forum translator. i need a little more time to write it (i was studying for my exams, remember that human?s life does not consist only in forum posts! )
so, sorry for the late. i will send it as faster i can .
see ya again people.
protoman no one

[amc]

0.99999999999999......... does not equel 1, it approaches 1 but does not equel 1
however when using such a number practicaly, it might as well be 1 but in theory it is not

and the egg came before the chicken
my basis for this is evolution and genetics. somthing that wasnt geneticly a chicken (but very close geneticly to) layed and egg that through genetic mutations and meiosis was geneticly a chicken.

[TyYann]

0.99999999999999......... does not equel 1, it approaches 1 but does not equel 1
however when using such a number practicaly, it might as well be 1 but in theory it is not

Really ? What is your proof ? Your arguments ?

It approaches 1 ? How close ?

A limit does exist and is reached.

If anybody has a doubt about it, I can give you a good example to make this point.

[kucalc]

ok, i will probe. can i submit a pdf or a word document to the forum? because i can?t print math symbols here......
don?t be angry kucalc (or the correct word is hungry? i can?t remember,excuse my english),
be serious, ok i will............
protoman no one

It's been months now...

Hm ... then show us this proof as soon as you have time.

But I'm sure you didn't hear about the definition of real numbers at highschool. As far as I remember then if you define x.9999 as x+1 you do essentially disprove the definition of real numbers. Do you really think that your knowledge you got in high-school is good enough for this?

(btw ... if you're american your high schools do aren't really the standard of education. A friend of mine is in the US for a year. He got a 3-4 (grade C-D) in germany in maths and now he is in the US, took the most difficult maths course offered and still is among the best of the year ... (just as a comment))

protoman_no_one, is most likely not American as you can see in his postings (His English is not really good). In parts of America, I think the level of education differs. Your friend was probably most likely using a CASIO, which would out-perform most American students who uses TIs, as CASIO calculators tend to be better for mathematics (rather than gaming, etc., as that is was I believe).

By the way, right now I'm taking AP (AP=College Level) Physics, AP Western Civilizations, AP Computer Science and also Pre-Calculus in my second year of highschool.

[M159852]

In my opinion 1=0.99999999

1/3=0.3333333333
1/3+1/3+1/3=0.999999999999
1/3+1/3+1/3=3/3=1
1=0.99999999999

maybe someone wrote this already I didn't read the whole thread

[Kilburn]

2.) Simple algebraic #2:

1/3 = 0.333333333...
(1/3)*3 = 0.99999... or 1

3.) Simple algebraic #3:

1/11 = 0.09090909...
+ 10/11 = 0.90909090...
= 11/11 = 0.99999999...

4.) Simple arithmetic #4:

2/7 = 0.2857142857...
+ 5/7 = 0.7142857142...
= 7/7 = 0.9999999999...

Yes, someone wrote it already.