0.9999999...=1.0

It's a fact. Deal with it, bitches.

>>80
true, but if he had used the word "particles" instead of strings it would of been more ermmm scientific?

the problem here is idiots not grasping the concept of infinity.

there is no such thing as 0.00~1 because you can't add a 1 after AN INFINITY of zeroes.

to clear things up, we should all write 0.999~ = 1.000~

i have th e proof as a ntoepad file in my docs
its relly long tho and u wont understand it it like alien explainng secrets

>>82
No one's going to fall for your lies.

>>82
The problem here is idiots not grasping the concept that 0.999... = 1 has been proven in so many different ways, by so many different people, for so many different years, that we're getting bored trying to convince you. You're like Young-Earth Creationists, and we have better things to do.

>>85
Oh, please! You don't seriously believe that the earth is several millions years old, do you? Just think, 40 tons of cosmic dust falls on Earth every day. If the Earth really was that old, it'd be covered in dust now!
All you have to rely on for your spurious claims are highly inaccurate carbon datings, which mistakenly assume that radioactive particles thousands of years ago behaved exactly as they do now.
Sheesh, gullible sheep like you are the reason so many people still believe that we actually landed on the moon.

>>82
Only a fag would bother with that shit.  Just write 1.

>>85
It's proven that the limiting value is 1, but no proof will convince everyone that 0.999... actually means or implies the limiting value in the first place, because not everyone has taken a post-secondary course about defining real numbers as limits.

0.9999......  < 1
Hence
0.9999...... != 1

GTFO

>>89
It is neither less than nor not equal to one.  Quite simply, it is a pile of shit to be avoided.

ITT people who have no idea what real numbers are and how the equality relation of real numbers is defined and trolls.

>>91
dont' give a shit

The irritating thing is that people keep confusing 0.999... (meaning the decimal place is followed by infinitely many nines) with some number where the nines stop. 0.999... is just another decimal expression of the number 1. It's just a matter of notation. Yes, if the nines stopped at any point, that number would be less than one. But every number has two expressions for their decimal expansions. (Ex. 3.00000 = 2.99999.....) It's just the nature of our number system.

>>93
every rational number?

>>93
no, they aren't confusing that at all.  it's that they see the nines as an ordered set that perpetually grows but of course does not finish growing, ever.

>>95
So ... it's like the NASDAQ?

>>5
Only if your rest mass is 0, or if SR/GR is wrong.

>>10
Phail @ GR.

>>13
On 4chan's /sci/, it is.

>>19
That's a shitty proof, and it's thrown around everywhere.

>>20
>>14 is being rigorous; RedCream was offering handwavy intuition.

>>48
As a general note, instead of all this bullshit about whether or not ".99..." is a series or not, why can't we just define real numbers as equivalence classes of cauchy sequences with the same limit?  This definition of real numbers is consistent with the original, and we'd kill half this non sense.

>>52
He makes too many of them for us to care about.  In this case, the connectedness of the topology is irrelevant.

>>56
GTFO Apartheid fag.  What convinces you that Pasis is from sub Saharan Africa?  He sounds Indian... oops, I got pwnt by >>65.

>>67
Yay.

>>68
swt = sweet?
澳门? 新加坡? 台湾(=中国)?

>>73
>>>double point precision.

>>79
Gravitons?  Gluons?

>>93

Not every number has two representations.  The only numbers with two decimal representations are rational numbers of the form n/(2^i 5^j).

For example, 1/3 and sqrt(2) have only one decimal representation each.

>>81
nothing wrong with a few 1-dimensional vibrating strings knocking around the place is there?

99.999... GET

>>98 >48

Uhh... what? I do not understand what are you talking about. May I have an example or two please? Ai kanot spikkin in 'saintipik' ingwish. Sou manny beeg n hado wards. Layman terms, if you may. I is a simple village ricepicker. =_=

>>98 >56+67

Eh, racism and its associated topics comes from the human ability to differentiate, in my personal opinion. It simply cannot be avoided or eliminated. Things like this is bound to surface, so I cannot be bothered to get mad about this.

>>98 >68

/swt as in *sweat*

Despite the assumption that all those of Chinese descent can automatically speak, read, listen, and write Chinese, I am a total banana. ._.

Singapore is close. My country is one of the major contributors to the attribute of lag, apparently.

>>101
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_number
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_class

Cauchy sequences are special in some way, though I fail to appreciate its importance.  It suffices to say that there is a theorem that says that all convergent sequences of real and rational numbers are cauchy (and vice versa).

I make reference to equivalence classes because that would eliminate all the hassle about ".999..." being a (geometric) series, number, blah blah blah.  By establishing all these things as elements of the same equivalence class, there is no ambiguity that all are equivalent to 1.

Thus .999...95, 1.000...1, .999... are all convergent sequences with a limit of 1, and hence are all equal to one.

Seeing differences is normal, but hating is much less so.  This is especially true for a /sci/ board.  I'm glad you're neutral.

I can barely read/write myself.  Sorry for assuming that you could.  You admitted that your English wasn't great, so I assumed that you were better at Chinese.

What kind of lag are you referring to?  Internet lag?

>>102
FYI, Cauchy sequences in rationals are not (necessarily) convergent. Eg, {3, 3.1, 3.14, 3.141, ...} is a Cauchy sequence of rational numbers which does not converge to any rational number. However, every Cauchy sequence of real numbers is convergent, as the real numbers are complete.

>>102
PAGE 61 THM 10.11 4TRAN.

A SEQUENCE IS A CONVERGENT SEQUENCE IF AND ONLY IF IT IS A CAUCHY SEQUENCE.

>>103
complete, completely boring at this  point, lol

>>102

Yeah. Internet lag of all kinds. Comes with a special blend of 11 herbs and spices. ._.

My country is part of the Commonwealth series in ED. /swt

What is the limit of 0.555... ?

(Sorry.  I couldn't resist.  Yeh, 107GET, lookin' for 999GET, etc.)

>>107

0.555...=1. I think some or all of the proofs used for 0.999...=1 can be applicable in this case as well.

>>103
Sorry, I was unclear in my statements.

Cauchy sequences whose elements are rational numbers converge to something (real numbers).
Cauchy sequences whose elements are real numbers converge to something (real numbers).

>>104
Thank you for pointing out the exact theorem.  What I said is not a contradiction, so all is well.

>>106
I fail to see how a country can be a major contributor to lag.  Is there a lot of spam coming out of your country?

>>107
5/9

>>108

Ai. I just went in and bathe, and I realized something while I was in there.

I was wrong on the limit of 0.555... /facepalm

Why am I so stupid?

The limit is... 5/9. ._.

Otherwise given as 0.555... again /heh

Sorry, I wasn't really thinking when I saw 107. /swt
This sucks when everything has to be pulled out straight from the head. I should refer to the articles and notes more and think about it first. ._.

>>107
RedCream

>>109 >106

That's why. I do not understand it myself as to why some people said so. I had few internet problems so far...

Even if ED mentioned in jest, I still suppose there must be some truth in it before any idea like that would stem out just like so. ._.

Either ways, I think quite a number of clues have been left as to where exactly is my country. /swt

0.9999...=/=1

0.9999... can be aproximated to 1, but it's not equal to one.

>>113
Troll

0.999..9 with a variable number of 9's approximates 1 with arbitrary precision.

0.999.... (with infinite 9's) IS 1

i.e. gtfo

Thanks for the responses.  I think my point is made.  Why is it that people accept 0.555...=5/9, yet they can't apply the same logic to conclude that 0.999...=1/1?

>>115
Because they're trolls/idiots?

>>40
Fail.
0.999... + 0....1 =/= 1
Learn your infinities.

0.000...1 is just the limit as x->inf of 10^-x which does equal 0.  So .999... + 0.000...1 = 1

>>115
because 0.999... is faggy

120 GET