Poll: Does 0.99 Recurring = 1

Does 0.99 Recurring = 1

  • Yes

    Votes: 225 42.5%

  • No

    Votes: 304 57.5%
  • Total voters
    529
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by Harley
Ah ha. We DO agree.

Thank gawd for that. Now I can start ignoring this thread. :D
Click to expand...
Yep. As you and I said, philosophy could mean we sit here and argue about it all night and day and get nowhere, and I imagine you need the sleepc as much as I do (unless you're an insomniac, but I doubt it). Suffice to say, I've had my fun, and points were shown (if not proven ;)) at certain people. I don't try to BS my way through things (I accepted my knowledges limitations 2 or 3 pages ago) so I suggest others don't. You never know when someone is calling your bluff :D
 
I dunno why I'm replying, because everything has been discussed a thousand times over. I guess I feel i deserve a post after reading all this crap. :p

Mathematically 0.9r does equal 1.

Linguistically 0.9r doesn't equal 1 (obviously).

I really can't see a way of making it philosophical.
0.9r is a number.
1 is a number.
= is a mathematical symbol.

Someone earlier said its philosophical if you ask "Do you think 0.9r equals 1?". But this is still mathematical, and so the only correct answer is yes.

If anyone can tell me how this thread can be taken as a philosophical discussion, I'd be interested to know how.

Haly - I think you should have admitted you didn't understand what you linked to from the start (maybe you did once before, but it seems you don't any more anyway).
Alpha - I think you've been taking this thread far too seriously (and been spending too much time here...).

Xenoxide - on the 0.0 recurring 1 stuff:
the way i see it is this is part of maths "as we know it", but of course is equal 0.0 recurring, which is equal to 0.
So 0.0 recurring 439684 is valid, but equal to 0 just as
1.000000 is valid, but equal to 1.

Finally for anyone else that still doesn't believe 0.9r = 1 (mathematically), this is the proof I find most elegant:

x = 0.9r
10*x=9.9r
10*x - x=9.9r - 0.9r
9x = 9
x=1
 
Originally posted by AlphaNumeric
You know the theorum you said :
Turns out I made it up :) Ashtons Theorum doesn't exist :D It's the surname of a mate of mine who I thought would bre approprioate for naming such a "theorum" after.

If you truely knew such things, you'd have instantly recognised the lack of Ashtons theorum in Banach spaces.

NEXT TIME DON'T BS YOUR WAY THROUGH A MATHS THEOREM, especially not one so advanced even Google can't help you Hence why you disappearing for 20 minutes to google for "Ashton Theorem, Banach" didn't help you If you do understand such things, I'll meet you in Swansea when I get home in 6 weeks and talk face to face perhaps?
Click to expand...

Doh :o
Just thought it was to do with banach due to you mentioning banach space etc (and of course can't remember much about that lol) but yeah I did BS my way thru that one, I'll hold my hands up to it ;) Fumbling in the dark there hehe.

Might be nice to meet face to face, probably learn a few things.


BTW to other posters yes I'm a girl. The thread for chatting me up is hidden in the depths somewhere but no it won't work :D
 
Originally posted by Haly
Doh :o
Just thought it was to do with banach due to you mentioning banach space etc (and of course can't remember much about that lol) but yeah I did BS my way thru that one, I'll hold my hands up to it ;) Fumbling in the dark there hehe.

Might be nice to meet face to face, probably learn a few things.


BTW to other posters yes I'm a girl. The thread for chatting me up is hidden in the depths somewhere but no it won't work :D
Click to expand...

omghi2u :p
 
Originally posted by Bodak
9x - 5 = 7 - 5x
This is "equal", I claim. However, it is only equal for one value of x. (Or some value of x, but not ALL x)

1 1 1
-------- = ----- - -----
x (x+1) x x+1
This is ALWAYS true, for any value of x. Try it. We call this an identity.

The forums do not like my text formatting. Bah.
Click to expand...

A simple identity would be

(x+y)(x-y) = X^2-Y^2

True for all values of X and Y

Standard result u get by opening the brackets.
 
Originally posted by AlphaNumeric
You never know when someone is calling your bluff :D
Click to expand...
Yup. Dirty trick. Comical and devastingly effective, but dirty. :D

I vaguely seem to remember someone famously winning an argument at an Oxford Union debate by quoting a legal precedent to do with the South Seas bubble, and then admitting years later that he'd made it up. Won the debate, though. :D

Wish I could remember who it was. Someone like Churchill, or Noel Coward, but I don't think it was actually either of them. Or, maybe, it's just one of those apocryphal stories. If it isn't true, it darn well ought to be. :)
 
Originally posted by Anarchy
Alpha - I think you've been taking this thread far too seriously (and been spending too much time here...).
Click to expand...
My existance revolves around embarassing people I don't know. That and upon going to said party the Porters had turned up and told people to go home. Must have lasted all over 20 seconds (no laughing at the back). Hence I posted here.
Originally posted by Anarchy
Haly - I think you should have admitted you didn't understand what you linked to from the start (maybe you did once before, but it seems you don't any more anyway).
Click to expand...
True. Haly, if you'd done so, I wouldn't have done what I did. But you stuck to a sinking ship, and "got drowned" (as the phrase I just made up goes).

/edit

Just seen your newest post. It was obvious you were "fumbeling in the dark". I have fumbled in the dark a few times, but I'll say I'm doing say. Please don't try that in future, you never know which mathmo I'll ask, and I know some people who'll make every lecturer in Swansea (your dad, my dad, everyones dad!) head spin! Can't fool them ;)
 
Originally posted by Harley
Yup. Dirty trick. Comical and devastingly effective, but dirty. :D
Click to expand...
While techniquely a lie, as the saying goes "theives unmask theives". A white elephant revealed a real elephant (what on earth am I talking about?), in the shape a such lies.

"Fortune Favours The Bold" (so goes the Star Trek DS9 episode), or according to S.speare "Fortune Favours the Brave", and I took the chance and made it. Such is the nature of life, business and everything else :) Haly would have found my lies if she knew about such things. It was a calculated risk on both our parts. Like in poker, one of us out bluffed the other :)
 
Actually I still stand by understanding that link enough to have a grasp of what it was suggesting ;) Although perhaps not to the highest standard.
The only time I was truly fumbling and BSing was with Ashton's Theorum. The rest I have encountered before but tbh didn't realise it was that high a standard of maths till Alpha said, had a bit of a strange past for someone my age really so guess it's from that.
 
Originally posted by Anarchy
If anyone can tell me how this thread can be taken as a philosophical discussion, I'd be interested to know how.
Click to expand...
Look at some of my posts, here and in the original thread. Or, simply consider that it involves a critical look at how we do things, and in particular, what infinity means. I gave one example to Alpha. How do you know when a proof is valid? Search for Fermat's Last Theorem and Wiles (on here) for some points.

If still in doubt, then on a more general level take a look at Principia Mathematica by Betrand Russelll and Alfred Whitehead for the application of philosophy to mathematics.
 
I haven't read the whole thread, but from what i have read i think you've overlooked something - any infinitely recursive series is just that, a series, and at any point that series will have a slightly different value.

Any comparison you do with infinity causes big problems because is not possible to evaluate properly. Hell, mathematitions can't even decide what happens when you do the basic arithmetic operations with it. 1/0 = inf? you would think so, but apparently not, inf/2 = ?.... inf?

If top mathematical brains the world over can't devide those things i don't think a bunch of geeks on a forum will be able to answer it :p :D

Let's just say for all intents and purposes 0.99r = 1, but technically maths hasn't advanced enough for us to determine the real answer.
 
I wish more people would hold the view of me / memphisto / Gilly(perhaps). Mathematically, 0.9r = 1. I've certainly conceded that fact after all these proofs, I can't deny the "10x - x" proof (as I've called it:p).

Now...will everyone stop pretending they know better, or does Alpha have to own you again:p :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom