[ 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: 12 KB, 689x455, 1355980225757.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014537 No.7014537[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

So 0.00...01 in a neither positive nor negative and transposes to 0 when they're added up, but my problem is: when infinity transpires it leaves 1 in a gray zone that's neither positive nor negative, how does math circumvent this without it breaking down to 1 equaling 0 or undefined?

>> No.7014541

>0.00...01

what the fuck is that supposed to be? That's not a number that exists in math. Thats like asking if "3.1fork4potato" is positive or negative.

>> No.7014543
File: 29 KB, 500x355, 406873_434361059952484_215614623_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014543

>>7014541
well there's 3 different kinds of the same number so I thought it would yield an interesting anylization

>> No.7014545

>>7014537
no that's a positive number

i suggest you refresh your memory on what a positive number is

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_number

>> No.7014547

>>7014543
the thing you posted isn't a number. It's not defined. It only superficially resembles a number.

>> No.7014551

>>7014547
x/inf, its a number

>> No.7014558

Imagine someone promises they'll go out on a date with you. And then they kill themselves to avoid it. That 1 is like the date that never was.

But seriously, there are some applications where saying <span class="math">\lim_{x\to\infty} 10^x = 0+[/spoiler] is relevant. But remember that 0+ is not so much a number as it is a concept.

>> No.7014564

>>7014558
fuck. -x or -infinity. every time.

>> No.7014566
File: 16 KB, 600x600, OP=faggot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014566

>>7014543
>>7014537
0/10 try harder

>> No.7014570
File: 6 KB, 262x192, 5325.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014570

>>7014566
So is the entire scientific community have a taboo reaction to defining zero? Because that's what it fucking looks like

>> No.7014575

>>7014570
>scientific
Oh you.

>> No.7014919
File: 104 KB, 492x402, 1357199295901.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7014919

>>7014566
Seriously though does how does this go unadressed its like the 3 bodied problem of math

>> No.7014929

>>7014541
Nonstandard reals

>> No.7014957

>>7014919
It's neither unaddressed nor an actual problem. It is an artifact solely of your own, personal misunderstanding of math.

>> No.7015055

>>7014957
it's something that could stand to be addressed... wait I you're saying having 0 being defined and having fucking lego to work with is not a bloody problem? I think it would be so cool if we could actually make some conditions for zero... and having a legitimate structure to build an empire of physics from

>> No.7015063 [DELETED] 

>>7014551
no, this is. what you said is nonsense.

\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty }\frac{x}{n}

and only for x being defined as a number and not something else

>> No.7015066

>>7014551
no, this is

<span class="math">\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty }\frac{x}{n}[/spoiler]

and only for x being defined as an object.
what you said is nonsense

>> No.7015072

>>7015055
You sound like you have autism.

>> No.7015081

>>7015072
That's not possible, autists are supposed to be good at math.

>> No.7015140

>>7015055
so tell me anon, what various drugs did you imbibe before posting today? because i find myself suddenly desiring them.

>> No.7015141

>>7014929
>lolno