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.
Debating about a mathematical construction whilst ignoring maths is as pointless and unconstructive as having a debate about quantum mechanics without knowing any physics and relying on common sense.
 
Originally posted by growse
Debating about a mathematical construction whilst ignoring maths is as pointless and unconstructive as having a debate about quantum mechanics without knowing any physics and relying on common sense.
Click to expand...

well put
 
Originally posted by Kyle Reece
Until you survey all the scientists and engineers who are "worth their salt" (which is itself another arbitary rank I assuming you alone would presume to grant) then your opinion carries no more weight than mine, for I was indeed stating my opinion.
Click to expand...
I think you'll find that putting 3.14 into any equation that requires serious accuracy (as the construction of bridges, buildings etc) needs, the error is enough to be considered "dangerous".
Originally posted by Kyle Reece
Go out and get me a length of material that is exactly 0.9r long.
Click to expand...
You missed the whole "Maths isn't related to reality" discussion didn't you?
Originally posted by Kyle Reece
I don't think I was. I simply stated the opinion that certain people in this thread were not able to understand an opinion of the subject not using a mathematical context.

You illustrated my point, and have been doing so this entire thread, quite nicely thank you.
Click to expand...
So 0.9r being a mathetmatical contstruct, 1 being a mathematical construct, and "=" being a mathematical construct means we shouldn't be talking about it in maths terms? What should we discuss a mathematical construct in? German?
 
Originally posted by TwoWheelTerror
both yes and no on the poll are correct..

in theory the number .99r can exist.. but

in practice it cannot and becomes 1
Click to expand...

Both those statements say 0.9r = 1, unless you mean "and becomes 1" due to rounding. In which case, that's valid, but then we use "Who said maths had any reflection on reality".
 
saying 0.9r isnt equal to 1, is similar to saying a circle doesnt exist it is just a n-gon, with n arbitarily large, as it is made from an infinite amount of straight lines.

does a circle exist?
 
Originally posted by AlphaNumeric
So 0.9r being a mathetmatical contstruct, 1 being a mathematical construct, and "=" being a mathematical construct means we shouldn't be talking about it in maths terms? What should we discuss a mathematical construct in? German?
Click to expand...

Germans know maths. I am sure many Germans know that 0.9r = 1 :)

Go out and get me a length of material that is exactly 0.9r long.
Click to expand...

Done. I have found a piece of paper that is EXACTLY 0.9r long. Of course, I have no idea in what unit its 0.9r long, but it must be in one unit or other :p

In the same way that the true number for pie is only useful in a pure mathematic environment. The rest of us are quite happy with pie being 3.14
Click to expand...

I like pie.






After having added my small amount of humour to this thread, I shall now retire to just reading the arguments in which people invent theorems, pull philosophy into a discussion about mathematics, use infinity in equations, and argue just for the hell of it :D
 
Originally posted by Bodak
Both those statements say 0.9r = 1, unless you mean "and becomes 1" due to rounding. In which case, that's valid, but then we use "Who said maths had any reflection on reality".
Click to expand...

I'll clarify.. in theory the r means that the 9's will go on forever.. it'll never = 1 because there is always a 0.000000[insert infinate 0's]001 needed to make it 1

Your right it has no reflection of reality..

try to take a practical value of .999r and it will always round up to 1
 
Originally posted by TwoWheelTerror
I'll clarify.. in theory the r means that the 9's will go on forever.. it'll never = 1 because there is always a 0.000000[insert infinate 0's]001 needed to make it 1
Click to expand...

You're happy to agree we're talking purely in maths now, so that's half the battle some people are missing. The other half, is this 0.0r1 idea people are comming up with, yourself included. If you have an inf. number of 0's, how can you stick a 1 on the end?

To quote Alpha, with this cute proof
Quoting myself :
Is 0.0r1 the closest number to zero you can get?

What about (0.0r1 + 0)/2 ? The average of 0.0r1 and 0. Obviously thats between 0.0r1 and 0, but 0.0r1 is the closest to zero possible.

(0.0r1+0)/2 = 0.0r1

0.0r1 = 2*0.0r1
Take 0.0r1 from both sides
0.0r1 = 0

Satisfied? If 0.0r1 isn't the closest number to zero, what is? After all how can you get smaller than infinite zeros and then a 1?
---------------------

Of course, this is all assuming 0.0r1 exists, which it doesn't, but then many people in this thread seem to think it does.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by TwoWheelTerror
I'll clarify.. in theory the r means that the 9's will go on forever.. it'll never = 1 because there is always a 0.000000[insert infinate 0's]001 needed to make it 1
Click to expand...
In theory, I proved (2 or 3 times repeatedly!) that this "number" 0.0........01 is actually zero. ;) Seem my posts on the previous 2 pages.
/edit Or rather just see the post above :p
 
Originally posted by TwoWheelTerror
I'll clarify.. in theory the r means that the 9's will go on forever.. it'll never = 1 because there is always a 0.000000[insert infinate 0's]001 needed to make it 1

Your right it has no reflection of reality..

try to take a practical value of .999r and it will always round up to 1
Click to expand...

Yes the r signifies that the 9s go on forever, and it is this property that makes it = 1, there is no requirement for a further bit added to it or rounding up.

The practical value of 0.9r is 1.

Jokester
 
Originally posted by Bodak
Indeed, it's the locus of points wich satisfy being a specific distance from a given point.
Click to expand...

yes this is my point just re-iterated the set of points is an infinite set of points, do an infinite set of points ever form the smooth curve used to make a circle?

I say yes but I also say 0.9r=1, but is it a "circle" or just a lot of points in the plane
 
Actually, a quick question, if 0.9r is actually equal to 1, where do we draw the line? Is there even a line drawn of the first number inferior to 1 that we will actually not dismiss as being equal to 1?

(if my question makes sense)
 
damn.. I've had inspiration and need to change my vote


pi is an irrational number.. with the most rational number for pi being 22/7

the most rational number for .99r is 1
 
Originally posted by carvegio
do an infinite set of points ever form the smooth curve used to make a circle?
Click to expand...
You need an infinite amount of points to form any smooth curve :)
Originally posted by KillerKebab
Actually, a quick question, if 0.9r is actually equal to 1, where do we draw the line? Is there even a line drawn of the first number inferior to 1 that we will actually not dismiss as being equal to 1?
Click to expand...
You mean at what point does 0.9, then 0.99, then 0.999 etc stop being 0.9999... and turn into 1?

Only when you put "r" after it.

0.99999999999999999999999999999999999 isn't 1.
0.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 isn't 1.
0.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 isn't 1.
etc etc
Only by putting "r" after 0.9 do you make it 1, because thats the property of such an infinite decimal expansion.
Originally posted by TwoWheelTerror
pi is an irrational number.. with the most rational number for pi being 22/7

the most rational number for .99r is 1
Click to expand...
Pi isn't 22/7 though (its close, but not equal), whereas 0.9r is 1. Any recurring decimal is infact rational. I can prove it if you want?
 
Originally posted by carvegio
yes this is my point just re-iterated the set of points is an infinite set of points, do an infinite set of points ever form the smooth curve used to make a circle?

I say yes but I also say 0.9r=1, but is it a "circle" or just a lot of points in the plane
Click to expand...

We define a circle to be the set of points that.... etc. So by definition, if the set had one point (somehow), two, up to an infinite number of such points, then it would always be a circle, by definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom