Printable View
Mathematically.
The way *I* understand the problem is that 0.999.... approaches 1 but never reaches one. Ergo they aren't equal.
However I was told this was an incorrect way to view it, so I appeal to you guys bc yer smart and stuff :)
Oh and this isn't a debate of whether 0.999.... = 1 or not, because it isn't equal. :)
I remember this thread. xD
I've never involved myself with maths enough to give a damn. But I'd go with your interpretation of it PG.
this is just low,
even by my standards.
why my god....I remember you from WAY back!! Haven't seen you post in forever PG. Didn't you have like a pikachu sig or somethin??
anyways the decimals probably keep repeating neverending so your right it doesnt equal one. But maybe they round???
I was abused in chat for not taking part in this thing.
So yeah, its good.
:mad2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
Yes, that website covers it better than I could have explained it to you.
Oh, now I remember why I dropped maths.
For something so concrete and provable, it sure is counter-intuitive sometimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuraid
It's valid, it works, and my head hurts now. Thanks Samuraid.
He might be a mathematical genius, however, the guy is also a total MORON because in trying to make math seem awesomesauce he states;
True, most likely. But Elvis, The Beatles, Johnny Cash, are still massive sellers 40, 50 years later.Quote:
In a year's time, every record currently in the UK Top 40 Singles Chart will have dropped out.
In five years' time, most of those artists will have also vanished without trace.
Yeah, which is why people still wear stuff from the 50's and 60's and 70's and 80's.Quote:
In fifteen years' time, everything you think you know about fashion will be laughably incorrect.
James Dean.Quote:
In fifty years' time, any movie star you can name today will be forgotten.
Probably true. And I'll let you know when that means Alexander Graham Bell never existed.Quote:
In a hundred years' time, every single piece of technology you own will be obsolete.
Yes, I had to look on Wikipedia for some leaders from 200+ years ago, so I suppose given that he's right and it's pointless to mention George Washington, King Henry VIII, Topiltzin Ce Acatl Quetzalcoatl, Augustus Caeser, Alexander The Great, Hammurabi, or Qin-Shi Huang.Quote:
In two hundred years' time, prominent world leaders like George W. Bush will be as unfamiliar to students of the day as President Zachary Taylor (1784-1850) is to us.
This has to be irony. Please tell me it's irony.Quote:
In a thousand years' time, Shakespeare will be just another piece of ancient history, as relevant as the Iliad.
Yes, because the Pacific Ocean has only been around for about four millennia. And the stars, we're not looking at things billions of years old there. Human civilization is at least a couple hundred thousand years old in a recognizable fashion, and ten thousand years plus of what we typically consider civilization has existed. In another two or three thousand years we'll reach a point where we can name individuals who lived ten thousand years ago.Quote:
In ten thousand years' time, everything you see will be gone, everything you know will have changed beyond recognition, and everyone you've ever heard of will have been forgotten for ever.
Anyway, to end my rant - maths is important, of course. It's a fundamental facet of the universe. But that's no call to make statements like these (He says "Fine, fine, I generalise, I make sweeping statements, I am melodramatic. But seriously. If you really, and I mean REALLY want to live forever, there is only one way to do it. A mathematical equation stands forever." apparently not realizing that there's a big difference between generalization/melodrama and outright lies. And that by his own logic Newton and Einstein will be forgotten, and only their equations will be remembered - which presumes our species will survive forever - which isn't immortality at all. Either that or he's thinking that mathematical equations do NOT in fact exist absent Humanity.) and he's so daft in these statements that I'm half-tempted to discount his mathematics.
God, PG, yes .999... = 1. >=o
For any distinct, real numbers A and B where A < B, there is a number x such that A < x < B. What number is between .999... and 1? Here's other ways of looking at it.
Don't be as dumb as Daniel now and argue about it for three pages.
Well not for three pages, but bleh.
I swore 0.999... < 1
:(
Well you're wrong, snookums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pureghetto
.9999999.... = 9/9 = 1.
Reading through that last math thread made me want to kill someone. Daniel demanding Unne prove that 1/9 = .1111.... for example. That one actually made me chuckle, though.
You guys all need to go back to high school math. :mad:
Math does not exist. Its current set has too many issues and flaws. 1 is != .99999 simply becuse they look nothing alike. Make sence.
I am infallable.
Bipper