[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 61 KB, 500x375, proxy.duckduckgo.com.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10228223 No.10228223 [Reply] [Original]

What's 1 - 0.999999999999999... ?

>> No.10228225

>>10228223
0.000...1

>> No.10228228

>>10228223
0
or if you prefer .00000...

>>10228225
no, get better bait

>> No.10228238

>>10228228
Why are /sci/ posters the worst at identifying sarcasm/jokes
I notice many reply serioisly to obvious joke threads involving "needing to learn x in y time. Am i fucked??"

>> No.10228241

>>10228238
Plot twist: They reply to bait others into complaining about bait.

>> No.10228243

>>10228241
Why are /sci/ posters the worst at identifying sarcasm/jokes
I notice many reply serioisly to obvious joke threads involving "needing to learn x in y time. Am i fucked??"

>> No.10228249
File: 34 KB, 640x480, my_elevated_tastes.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10228249

>>10228238
Line, Hook and Sinker

>> No.10228257

-1/12

>> No.10228268

>>10228225
>Decimal Places in the Neighborhood of Infinity

>> No.10228271

>>10228268
STOP, you’ll summon him!

>> No.10228278

Guys Im gonna say the N word

>> No.10228297

>>10228278
NINEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>> No.10228338

your iq

>> No.10228343

>>10228223
dx

>> No.10228370

0.111111... = 1/9
0.999999... = 9/9 = 1
1-1 = 0

>> No.10228492

>>10228370
but .111... doesn't equal 1/9

>> No.10228501

>>10228492
Yes it does, stop saying obviously stupid things just to be contrarian.

>> No.10228509

>>10228225
0.1 = 10^-1
0.01 = 10^-2
:
0.000...1 = 10^-inf = 0

>> No.10228514
File: 1.57 MB, 447x407, FASTER.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10228514

>>10228509
>infinity

>> No.10228519

>>10228223
=3*(1/3 - 0.33333333...)
=3*(0.33333333... - 0.33333333...)
=3*(0.00000000...)
=0.00000000...
=1

>> No.10228521

>>10228492
fucking brainlet go watch numberphile

>> No.10228524

>>10228514
yes retard, infinity

>> No.10228530

>>10228519
[math]
1 = \dfrac{3}{3} = 3 \cdot \dfrac{1}{3} = 3 \cdot 0.\bar{3} = 0.\bar{9}
[/math]

>> No.10228533

>>10228223
0, because they're both decimal representations of 1
/thread

>> No.10228542

>infinitards

>> No.10228558

[math]-1 = \sqrt{-1}\times\sqrt{-1}=\sqrt{-1\times-1}=\sqrt{1}=1[/math]

>> No.10228561
File: 107 KB, 564x761, Apollo, House of Apollo (Pompeii).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10228561

there are nine (9) frogposting threads in the catalog right now

>> No.10228610

>>10228558
[math]
-1 = \sqrt{-1} \times \sqrt{-1} \neq \sqrt{-1 \times-1}= \sqrt{1}=1
[/math]

>> No.10228614

>>10228610
>[math]\sqrt{a}\times\sqrt{a}\neq\sqrt{a^2}[/math]

>> No.10228631

>>10228614
-1 =/= 1

>> No.10228634

>>10228631
that is a narrow way of looking at things

>> No.10228643

>>10228634
>why can't we all just get along
get a job, hippie

>> No.10228680

>>10228223
Taking the bait, here is my answer.

First, let's talk about your weird number.
0.9999999999999...

>>10228370
This proof is not valid because what says 0.11111... is the same as 1/9 ? In the same way, adding infinite series is much more complicated than middleschool-level maths.

Let's suppose 0.999999... exists, what are its properties ? It's the closest number to 1. Let's call that number x.
x = 1-ε
where ε is the closest strictly positive number to 0. So what you're asking is, does ε exists ?
Let's use a bit of formalism for convenience.
∀x > 0 ∈ R, ε ≤ x
(For all strictly positive real numbers superior to 0, ε is smaller or equal)
But, ε/2 < ε, and ε/2 ∈ R.
So we have ε/2 < ε ≤ ε/2, which is a contradiction. Hence ε does not exist.
Conclusion, 0.99999999... is not a number.

This question has no sense.
But let's think of the number as a series, which is an infinite sum. Then
x = Σ(1/9)*(1/10^n)
According to the convergent series formula (which we can apply since the series is geometric, exercise left to the reader), x = 1.
So, 1-0.999999... either does not exists, or is equal to 0. It depends on what you meant.

>> No.10228687

lim 0+

>> No.10228691

why is there still no trollbait image of this

>> No.10228708

1 ez

>> No.10228934

>>10228614
yeah thats true. whats your point
https://youtu.be/nzk4kkZbz4w

>> No.10228985

>>10228225
>a decimal that ends with 1 yet at the same time continues forever with 0s

>> No.10228997

>>10228223
0 lol

>> No.10228998

>>10228680
Cringe

>> No.10228999

>>10228680
>Let's suppose 0.999999... exists, what are its properties ? It's the closest number to 1.
That is bullshit that you made up.

>> No.10229075

>>10228934
square root is defined for nonzero numbers and sqrt(a)*sqrt(b) is always sqrt(a*b)
real fallacy is sqrt(-1) is not defined but i^2 is defined to be -1

>> No.10229097

>>10229075
>t. middle schooler

>> No.10229101

>>10228680
>But, ε/2 < ε
Incorrect.

>> No.10229106

>>10229097
>t.primary schooler

>> No.10229110

>>10229106
>saying sqrt(-1) isnt defined and then trying to act more educated than someone else
>saying the square root isnt defined for 0 what the fuck
>just saying sqrta * sqrtb = sqrtab without a fucking proof
>ignoring a counter example to your fake theorem

>> No.10229116

>>10229110
it is a corollary not a theorem

>> No.10229119

>>10229116
then it should be really easy to give a proof and the counter example shouldnt exist

>> No.10229124

>>10229119
don't care, I just proved that -1=1 in a frog thread

>> No.10229126

>>10228238
Why do you always use the same example?

>> No.10229132

>>10229124
"proved"*

>> No.10229149

>>10229132
prooffen

>> No.10229241

>>10228225
Ahahahhahaha I love this one honestly

>> No.10229242

>>10229241
0=0.000...1
0=0.000...2
Then 0.000...1 = 0.000...2
Then 1=2

>> No.10229276

Dio porco

>> No.10229325

0+

>> No.10229328
File: 618 KB, 3400x4400, fuggg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10229328

>>10228223
[math]\widehat{0}[/math]

>> No.10229357

>>10229101
I'd like you to explain why

>> No.10230062
File: 23 KB, 274x205, irrational.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10230062

>>10228223

>> No.10230063

>>10228249
That guy in bg has three mouths.

>> No.10230150

>>10228223
all we can honestly say is that it's less than one and greater than zero.


it's impossible to actually fully perform the operation.

>> No.10230153

>>10229242
>∞ = ∞+1
>∞ = ∞+2
>then ∞+1 = ∞+2
>then 1 = 2

>> No.10230160
File: 25 KB, 387x289, 21.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10230160

>>10230150
>greater than zero

>> No.10230162

>>10230160
Why are /sci/ posters the worst at identifying sarcasm/jokes
I notice many reply serioisly to obvious joke threads involving "needing to learn x in y time. Am i fucked??"

>> No.10230165

>>10230153
tooker fan detected

>> No.10230178

>>10230165
literally who?

>> No.10230219

>>10229242
Cant divide by 0

>> No.10230231

>>10228223
What used to be an actual problem was the way computers represented small fractions in binary so you couldn't program (a==b) to check for equality, instead you'd have to do something like (abs(a-b) < 0.0001)

>> No.10230236

>>10230219
true, but this is interesting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxpowBoPieQ

>> No.10230241

>>10230231
Why are you saying that like that's not still the case? Floating point arithmetic does not behave like normal arithmetic

>> No.10231524

>>10229075
>square root is defined for nonzero numbers
0^2 = 0 ∴ sqrt(0^2) = sqrt(0) ∴ 0 = sqrt(0)

>> No.10231714

>>10228223
about tree fiddy

>> No.10231723

It's 3 to the 1 to the 1 to the 3

I like good pussy and I like good trees.

>> No.10233354

the answer is chainlink 1k eoy

>> No.10233360

>>10233354
Just needs a 125% gain every day till eoy, no sweat

>> No.10233386

>>10228680
There's nothing inherently wromg with being infinitesimal

>t. Abraham Robinson

>> No.10233680

>>10228558
the square root of any complex number has 2 solutions
so √1=+1 and -1 cause (-1)^2=1 and (+1)^2=2

>> No.10233806

>>10233680
equations have solutions

sqrt is just a simple function, with one output
[math]
\sqrt {x^2} \ne \pm x, \quad \sqrt {x^2} = \left | x \right |
[/math]

>> No.10233864

1 - 0.9 = 0.1
1 - 0.999 = 0.001

for N 9's, there are (N-1) 0's, then a 1.

for infinite 9's, there are sub-infinite (finite) 0's, then a 1

1 - 0.999... = 0.000...1

"..." : concatenated repeating pattern

>> No.10233889

>>10228680
>So we have ε/2 < ε ≤ ε/2, which is a contradiction. Hence ε does not exist.
Wrong. Given your ridiculous setup,
ε/2 = ε = 0
>Conclusion, 0.99999999... is not a number
Your conclusion is baseless and retarded, your assertions do not logically follow, and your immediate assumption that 0.99... is "the closest number to 1" is pulled out of your ass.

>> No.10233937

>>10233864
>>10228509

>> No.10233965

>>10228985
>it continues forever with 9's and at the end there's a 9