[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 36 KB, 636x331, Screenshot_99.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How can retards on this board actually believe that 0.999... = 1? If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1.

Also... math using infinity does not exist, it is all flawed. Calculus is an approximation.

As well... the null set is not a subset of every step. To have no properties is not a property. Vacuous truths do not exist, they are just insanity.

 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:09:15 2018 No.9607944   File: 213 KB, 700x460, 1521493375752 (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9607937sage
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:24:39 2018 No.9607978 >>9607944Is this would this board relies on when they cannot offer a decent counter argument?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:38:58 2018 No.9608001 >>9607937>How can retards on this board actually believe that .5 + .5 = 1? If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:42:18 2018 No.9608007 >>9607937>If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1that's indeed the case, you can just write 1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:44:35 2018 No.9608011 >>9607937More generally, every nonzero terminating decimal has two equal representations (for example, 8.32 and 8.31999...), a property true of all base representations. The utilitarian preference for the terminating decimal representation contributes to the misconception that it is the only representation. For this and other reasons—such as rigorous proofs relying on non-elementary techniques, properties, or disciplines—mathematics students can find the equality sufficiently counterintuitive that they question or reject it. This has been the subject of several studies in trolls on mathematics education.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:45:48 2018 No.9608015 1/3+1/3+1/3=11/3=0.333...0.333...+0.333...+0.333...=0.999...
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 02:58:35 2018 No.9608032 >>9607937>Vacuous truths do not existYes they do. For example "If OP wasn't a faggot, he would make good threads."
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:00:57 2018 No.9608035 >>9607937OP, what is 9.999.../10 ?is it =1 , >1 or <1 ?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:01:17 2018 No.9608036 >>9608001There is no addition going on here. It is a single element.>>9608011This is just arbitrarily claimed. There is no reason for this to be the case. 0.999.. is simply close to 1, it does not equal 1.>>96080151/3 does not equal 0.333...>>9608032This is not an example of a vacuous truth.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:01:31 2018 No.9608037 >>9607937Oh boy. The infinitard is back
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:02:20 2018 No.9608039 >>9608035Very obviously it is less than 1.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:05:57 2018 No.9608043 >>9608039is it more than 0.9 ?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:07:10 2018 No.9608047 >>9608039Yes.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:09:08 2018 No.9608049 >>9608043Your misunderstanding arises from the fact that you believe infinity is a real thing. The concept inherently states that it does not terminate and therefore it is not a number. There is no such thing as 0.999... numbers are definite. They are not changing.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:11:39 2018 No.9608051 >>9608049is 9.999.../10 = 0.999... ?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:39:01 2018 No.9608087 File: 1015 KB, 290x149, but why.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...anon
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 03:59:52 2018 No.9608121 >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...it's just different notation we use to write about the same thing, same as 0.999... and 1 you fucking moron
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:07:55 2018 No.9608136 1/3 = 3/10 + 1/30 = 0.3 + 1/30= 0.3 + 3/100 + 1/300 = 0.33 + 1/300= 0.33 + 3/1000 + 1/3000 = 0.333 + 1/3000= 0.333... + 1/inf = 0.333... + 0 = 0.333...
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:22:58 2018 No.9608153 >>9608049/thread
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:32:39 2018 No.9608167 I will address your responses when I wake up.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:35:34 2018 No.9608171 OP why dont you worry about furthering your education or doing something with your knowledge and accepting life for what it is instead of autistic screeching online.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:36:34 2018 No.9608173 >>9607937>How can retards on this board actually believe that 0.999... = 1?it is true by definition.>If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1.then 2/1=2 is false because I could just write 2?Yes, I saged.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:38:16 2018 No.9608177 >>9608036>This is just arbitrarily claimed.Like all of math, yes.>1/3 does not equal 0.333...Wrong by definition.>>9608049>Your misunderstanding arises from the fact that you believe infinity is a real thing.If you want to do math outside of ZFC go ahead.But don't make claims inside of ZFC, while denying ZFC.You are doing a different mathematics.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 04:41:20 2018 No.9608182 >>9608049So you also believe that 1.000... != 1, right? After all infinity can't exist so it's not a number.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 05:54:23 2018 No.9608234 >>9608182this kills the 0.999...=1 denier
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 08:51:24 2018 No.9608405 >>9608182underrrated post
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 08:53:23 2018 No.9608410 How can retards on this board actually believe that 2 + 2 = 4? If it was actually 4, you would just write 4.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:07:52 2018 No.9608434 >>9607937Is eternity ever increasing or is eternity just eternal?"To P or Not to P?", that is the question.For whether it is nobler in the mind to have P = NP or to just let it equal to one.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:15:26 2018 No.9608450 >>9608434>Is eternity ever increasing or is eternity just eternal?https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=infinityAn unbounded quantity that is greater than every real number.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:27:24 2018 No.9608470 >>9608049>0.999... is less than 1>0.999... is not a numberPick one retard.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:30:17 2018 No.9608478
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:48:15 2018 No.9608511
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 09:53:00 2018 No.9608520 The funny thing is that this retard linked to wolframalpha as evidence in the past yet wolframalpha itself does say that 0.999... repeating is 1.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 10:49:36 2018 No.9608579 >>9608182Incorrect, tapping on zeroes does not change tjethe value of a number. >>9608173No, most math is derived from real like axioms.1/3 does not equal 0.333..., it is a flaw in your writing system. 1/3 exists on the number line but it is not 0.333..., that is simply an approximation.I am claiming all infinity related math is based on false premises and should be treated like the autistic mind jerking it is.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 10:51:31 2018 No.9608583 >>9608579Kys
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 10:53:30 2018 No.9608586 >>9607937Here's why:Let's say 1/3 = 0.333... this is in base 101/3 * 3 = 1.0.333... * 3 = 1If 0.333... (repeating forever) is equal to 1/3, then 0.333... * 3 = 1. That is how fractions work.However, 0.333... (if not being used in a fractional sense) is multiplied by 3, it will not be equal to one. 0.333 * 3 = 0.999... which is not equal to one. it is 0.00...1 less than 1.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 10:53:51 2018 No.9608587 >>9608579>No, most math is derived from real like axioms.It is based on ZFC, brainlet.>1/3 does not equal 0.333Wrong by definition.>1/3 exists on the number line but it is not 0.333...Wrong by definition.>that is simply an approximationWrong by definition.>I am claiming all infinity related math is based on false premises and should be treated like the autistic mind jerking it is.Okay.You can change the axioms all you want, but you are doing other mathematics unrelated to everything else.You are essentially redefining terms to fit your needs.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:00:59 2018 No.9608603 0.999... doesn't actually exist.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:01:37 2018 No.9608604 >>9608603Wrong by definition.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:09:20 2018 No.9608617 >>9607937I think the idea is that we know it's not equal to one so we find a separate isometry where it is equal to one and use that on our original plane.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:13:21 2018 No.9608626 >>9607944Posting an image nullifies your sage.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:19:40 2018 No.9608640 1 is not 0.99999..The difference is 0.0...1, the digit 1 comes after an infinite seqence of 0s.After an infinite sequence..Oh wait
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:23:21 2018 No.9608651 >>9608586>it is 0.00...1 less than 1.anything after "..." can be ignored0.00...1=0.00...=0
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:25:48 2018 No.9608658 >>9608640At the end of an endless sequence.would be better said
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:28:39 2018 No.9608665 >>9608626Wow, they don’t teach you that one in the newfag academy.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 11:55:21 2018 No.9608718 File: 95 KB, 960x960, 75LrFgi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] Why do meme threads like these always get so many replies, while well thought ones are met with a barrage of insults and dismissals?Are you all so bored?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:00:23 2018 No.9608729 >>9607937I haven't posted in or even read the thread yet. Even then I know you're a complete brainlet, OP. You're completely ignorant of ALL THE RULES OF ANALYSIS. You don't know what LIMITS are, never seen an epsilon or delta in your life. You dont know know what CONVERGENCE or DIVERGENCE mean. You can only think of math in terms of physical counterparts and processes, unaware of the abstractions needed to properly understand the ideas. I've argued with you in maybe 4 other threads ad nauseam and there's nothing more to say besides "You're a mathlet who doesn't know shit".
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:04:31 2018 No.9608738 >>9608718These threads make me so goddamn mad
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:04:47 2018 No.9608739 >>9608586What is 0.000...1? Infinite 0s after the decimal place followed by a 1? Then that's just equal to 0 since you will never reach the 1 since there are infinite 0s before it
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:04:55 2018 No.9608741 >>96079370 is zero. 1 is one. 0.99999 is somewhere in between. All of you, fuck off!There is a difference, obviously, from actual eternity and eternal approximation. Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:06:09 2018 No.9608745 >>96087390.000....1 is not a real number
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:07:55 2018 No.9608751 >>96087410.9999 =/= 9/10+9/100+9/1000... = 0.9... = 1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:09:50 2018 No.9608755 >>9608745Explain exactly what you mean by 0.000...1 then. There is no convention of what ... means here
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:09:54 2018 No.9608756 >>9608739What have you done?https://youtu.be/Jm2D7ohWos0
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:18:17 2018 No.9608771 >>9608718because your whining is so amusing
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:18:27 2018 No.9608772 >>96087559/10+9/100+9/1000+.... by definition is equal to$9*\lim_{m\to\infty}\sum_{n=1}^m10^{-n}$0.0...1 is utterly meaningless in ALL CONTEXTS.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:19:47 2018 No.9608777 >>9608739>tfw an anon broke... everything. https://youtu.be/6bdHBoG2bLY
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:20:38 2018 No.9608780 >>9608772Are you >>9608586? No? Then fuck off you dumb nigger
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:22:22 2018 No.9608783 >>9608780You responded to>>9608745Which is me. Youre so idiotic you can't keep track of your arguments.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:25:36 2018 No.9608787 >>9608780>identity mathstupidity, now extra strong
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:26:19 2018 No.9608788 >>9608783>>9608745Don't reply to me ever again
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:28:23 2018 No.9608791 >>9608772>0.0...1 is utterly meaningless in ALL CONTEXTS.Which is why I asked >>9608586 to define what he means
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:28:28 2018 No.9608792 >>9608788Why? Can you not respond to my argument that 0.0...1 is meaningless?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:30:22 2018 No.9608797 >>9608791To which I said 0.0...1 is not a real number and thus the conversation went. Are you actually autistic? What's your point?0.9..=1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:32:24 2018 No.9608800 So what is 1/3 then?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:32:48 2018 No.9608802 >>96087970.000...1 is a real number if by 0.000...1 you mean $\lim_{x\to\infty}\frac{1}{x}$
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:35:07 2018 No.9608803 >>9608797How is 0.000...1 meaningless. Can you not tell that he is trying to say infinite 0s followed by a 1?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:35:47 2018 No.9608805 >>9607937>How can retards on this board actually believe that 0.999... = 1? If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1.How can retards on this board believe that 0.25 = 1/4? If it was equal to 1/4, you would just write 1/4. Nice try plebs
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:36:52 2018 No.9608807 >>96088001/3=3/10+3/100+3/1000+...=0.333...=a3a=1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:37:38 2018 No.9608810 >>9608805No, because 1/4 is 1 divided by 4. 0.25 is the actual number
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:38:53 2018 No.9608812 >>9608807You are mistaken
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:41:29 2018 No.9608816 >>9608802If we're defining $a=0.0...1=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}$ then yeah, a=0. But a lot of these brainlet "0.999...=/=1" claimers try to construct 0.0...1 as some sort of weird infinitesimal... which it is not.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:42:33 2018 No.9608820 >>9608812How?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:44:07 2018 No.9608824 >>9608820Those are not equal
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:45:34 2018 No.9608831   >>9608820They are all equal to each other, by very definition.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:47:21 2018 No.9608836 >>9608824Refer to >>9608772just replace all the 3s with 9s. You don't know basic mathematical definitions.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:48:11 2018 No.9608838 >>9608836Wrong
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:48:57 2018 No.9608841 >>9608838Insufferable. You've given up.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:50:25 2018 No.9608850 File: 116 KB, 565x800, Aleks Klepnev.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608771>your whininghuh? It was merely a question..
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:50:40 2018 No.9608851 >>96088243/10 + 3/100 + 3/1000 + ... = 3 * sum of (1/10)^n, n from 1 to inf= 3 * ((1/10)/ 1 - (1/10))= 3 * (1/10 * 10/9) = 3/9 = 1/3
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:50:57 2018 No.9608853 >>9608841Not an argument
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:51:53 2018 No.9608855 >>9608853"Wrong" isn't an argument either. Do you read your responses before hitting send? What part is wrong?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:51:54 2018 No.9608856 >>9608850KEK
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:52:05 2018 No.9608857 >>9608851This part is correct
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:52:39 2018 No.9608861 File: 761 KB, 1027x722, 1498490006987.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] Don't you guys ever get tired?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:53:53 2018 No.9608863 >>96088101 is 1/1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:54:01 2018 No.9608864 >>9608861Extremely. This fucker needs to leave my board.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:55:07 2018 No.9608868 >>9608864Ignore baiters and they'll get bored
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:55:21 2018 No.9608873 >>9608857you can do the same for 0.999...0.999.. = 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...= 9 * (1/10 + 1/100 + 1/1000 + ...)= 9 * sum of (1/10)^n, n from 1 to inf= 9 * 1/9 = 9/9 = 1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:56:44 2018 No.9608878 >>9608873I agree with everything, except the part where 0.999...=1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 12:58:27 2018 No.9608885 >>9608878Then you're being patently illogical. You can't simultaneously think >>9608851 is correct and think >>9608873 is wrong. They are equivalent. 0.9...=1 is a direct result of >>9608851
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:03:42 2018 No.9608892 File: 427 KB, 468x596, maddie.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608856Well if it amuses you so much, then by all means go on. Gotta do something for that boredom. I suggest watching a few DONG videos from vsauce. They have some very entertaining sites to kill time.Here's a couple of examples:http://media.hhmi.org/biointeractive/click/explore-your-inner-animals/?_ga=2.177473253.1301542994.1518480581-699706204.1518480581http://brainu.org/lesson/virtual-neurons
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:06:51 2018 No.9608898 >>9608892>trying this hard
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:10:27 2018 No.9608900 >>9608579>I am claiming all infinity related math is based on false premises and should be treated like the autistic mind jerking it is.So should we throw out anything that we learned based on infinity related math? Like calculus and differential equations? How about the physics that and all technology that stemmed from it? Good idea. I agree, but I think you should go first and get off the internet and trash your computer.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:15:19 2018 No.9608915 File: 616 KB, 2518x1024, 1514353787347.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:26:35 2018 No.9608936 >>9608892>>9608892If0.999 *inf* 999 + 0.000 *inf* 001 = 1Then call0.999 *inf* 999 = AAnd call0.000 *inf* 001 = BA + B = 1A = 1 - BTherefore.A < 1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:30:27 2018 No.9608945 >>9608936>0.999 *inf* 999>0.000 *inf* 001No such things.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:31:56 2018 No.9608949 >>96089360.999...999 is not a real number
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:33:43 2018 No.9608955 Let 1/9= 0.111...Multiplying both sides of the equation by 9 will give you:1=0.999...
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:39:36 2018 No.9608960 >>9608945>waah stop using infinity where I dont want you to
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:41:03 2018 No.9608962 >>9608960>waah let me do whatever I want even if that's not how limits and sums work
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:46:43 2018 No.9608973 There is no such thing as 0.000...1.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:47:43 2018 No.9608976 >>9608936>A = 1 - B>Therefore.>A < 1What if B=0? Then A=1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:47:47 2018 No.9608978 >>9608973>waah only im allowed to use repeating decimals
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:52:06 2018 No.9608988 >>9608978Repeating decimals make sense only if then can be represented by an infinite sum. You a little dense? 0.9...9 cannot be represented as such so it makes no sense.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:53:22 2018 No.9608990 >>96089880.999...9 is the same as 0.999...
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:53:55 2018 No.9608991 >>9608978refer to>>9608816
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:54:55 2018 No.9608993 >>9608990The proof still doesn't work because you didn't establish B>0
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 13:55:02 2018 No.9608994 >>9608978>Decide that infinitively repeating decimals are wrong because can't reach infinity>0.000...1 is real even though that's literally a terminating digit after an infinite number of zeros.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:14:47 2018 No.9609036 >>9607937Why do you keep making this thread?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:16:35 2018 No.9609044 >>9608015Stop>>9608011Feeding>>9608035The>>9608136TrollEveryone who pretends to not understand is trolling you.Everyone who pretends to not understand is trolling you.Everyone who pretends to not understand is trolling you.Everyone who pretends to not understand is trolling you.Stop making these fucking threads. Make sure to report.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:25:31 2018 No.9609057 >>9609044fuck off granpa, it's not your lawn
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:42:22 2018 No.9609089 >>9608993What are you talking about? I didn't post any proof
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:43:36 2018 No.9609094 >>9609044Stop spoonfeeding the retards
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:44:18 2018 No.9609095 >>9609044These threads are created to spot the true retards
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:46:34 2018 No.9609102 For fuck's sake, /sci/. This is the most obvious bait I've ever seen and you're still taking it.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 14:50:30 2018 No.9609116 it's a simple geometric series
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 15:49:34 2018 No.9609270 $x= \frac{1}{10} \\0. \overline{9}=9x+9x^2+9x^3+9x^4+ \cdots \\0. \overline{9}=9x \left (1+x+x^2+x^3+ \cdots \right ) \\0. \overline{9}=(1-x) \left (1+\mathbf{x}+x^2+\mathbf{x^3}+x^4+ \cdots \right ) \\0. \overline{9}=1-x+ \mathbf{x-x^2}+x^2-x^3+ \mathbf{x^3-x^4}+x^4-x^5+ \cdots \\0. \overline{9}=1$
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 16:14:48 2018 No.9609329 >>96079371 - 0.999...=/= 00.999...=/= 10.000...01 =/= 00.999... + 0.000...01 = 1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 16:18:59 2018 No.9609340 >>9609329No such thing as 0.000...1
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 16:42:08 2018 No.9609390 >>9609340No such thing as 0.999...
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 16:42:53 2018 No.9609393 >>96079370,9999... = 0,9+0,09... = 9*(0,1+0,01+...) = 9 * Sigma (from k=1 to infinity) (10^-k)Which converges to 1. This means 0,999... = 1.What do I win?
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 16:46:27 2018 No.9609399 >>9609329>0.999... + 0.000...01 = 11 + 0 = 1duh
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 19:24:41 2018 No.9609678 File: 73 KB, 1024x1024, bait 0.9.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 19:56:01 2018 No.9609741 >>9609329>0.000...01 =/= 0that doesn't exist.
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 19:58:05 2018 No.9609746 >>9607937by definition of the logical operator '= 'we have that a = b iff for all e>0 |a-b| < e
 >> Anonymous Wed Mar 21 23:33:12 2018 No.9610118 File: 48 KB, 800x729, 8nRqoXW.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:01:15 2018 No.9610162 >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:18:19 2018 No.9610181 >>9610118>>9610162I'm not going to quote the other 1/3 = 0.333... retards.0.333 is the decimal APPROXIMATION of 1/3.It does not EQUAL 1/3.Also to the fags going 2+2 = 4, why not just write 4?Use your brain to do things other than imagine anime girls. No one said two elements cannot combine to equal another element. The claim is that you are claiming singular elements are the EXACT same yet writing them differently in the same notation (decimal).Infinity does not exist. 0.999... is not a number.>>9609393Retard that thinks convergence means equal. I guess asymptotes don't exist either!I also like how none of you retards even tried to argue against me in regards to the null set. Just shows your level of education, if all you can argue against is 0.999.. != 1.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:37:18 2018 No.9610193 >>9610181>I also like how none of you retards even tried to argue against me in regards to the null set.Hopefully I don't have to convince you that $a+0=a$. You could say that every number is the same as that number combined with zero. Sometimes it's useful to acknowledge this fact, sometimes it's not, but it's always true. By the same logic, you can add the null set to any other set and not change the original set, ie. you can add zero to the set's cardinality and not change it. So, just like before, sometimes it's convenient to say that a set contains all it's stated elements and some extra nothing. Since you can do this with every set, $\emptyset$ is a subset of every set.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:52:53 2018 No.9610217 >>9610193As per my previous statement, 0 is not an element. Retard.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:54:37 2018 No.9610220 >>9610217$\emptyset \neq 0$
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:54:55 2018 No.9610221 >>9610193The null set possesses no properties. Therefore it cannot be a subset of every set. It is also for this reason vacuous truths do not exist."All the females in this room are nude" when there are no females is not a true statement. It is a nonsensical one. Similarly, the null set is not a subset of every set.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 00:55:58 2018 No.9610223 >>9610220This was to your previous statement that a + 0 = a. You are not adding two elements. You are simply saying a = a.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:01:51 2018 No.9610232 >>9610221>The null set possesses no properties. Therefore it cannot be a subset of every set.That's a big ol' leap you took there between those two statements. Care to explain further?>"All the females in this room are nude" when there are no females is not a true statement.How does this relate to null sets? If your original set is the set of females in the room, the null set would be something like the empty space in the room.>>9610223If this is what you really think, you may need to go back to high school algebra before you start arguing about set theory. Otherwise, you are one very committed troll indeed.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:09:13 2018 No.9610242 >>9610232Something that does not exist and indeed is defined as having no properties can not be an element of anything at all.It relates to null sets because of the idea that "having no properties" allows it to be a subset of every set. For this reason, it is said that all members of the empty set possess any and indeed all properties. And thus, if P --> Q and P is untrue, Q is always true. This is a nonsensical statement and it is only allowed due to the idea that the null set is a property of every set.Also adhoms will not help you here. Go ahead and define how 0 is an element without just declaring it :) I say 0 has no elements.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:27:06 2018 No.9610266 >>9610242>Something that does not exist and indeed is defined as having no properties can not be an element of anything at all.Empty sets do exist, just like empty rooms do, as in your example above. Also it's not really true that null sets have no properties: they have the property of being subsets of every set ;)>it is said that all members of the empty set possess any and indeed all properties.It is said by whom? Null sets have no "members" so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.>>9610242>P --> Q and P is untrue, Q is always true.You've got this wrong. If $P$ is false then the entire implication $P \implies Q$ is false, not $Q$ itself. There's nothing nonsensical about that.>Go ahead and define how 0 is an element without just declaring itAgain, 0 and the null set are not the same thing, and $\{0\} \neq \emptyset$.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:35:53 2018 No.9610280 >>9610266You argue with the intelligence of a child.Empty sets do not exist, they are the absence of existence. :thinking:>It is said by whom?So you do not know what vacuous truths are? Here let google help you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truthEducate yourself :)>You've got this wrong. If P is false then the entire implication P⟹Q is false, not Q itselfIncorrect, as per the above link.>Again, 0 and the null set are not the same thing, and {0}≠O.You said a + 0 = a, not a + O.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:38:27 2018 No.9610287 Squares to Zero....9^2 = .81.9^3 = .729.9^4 = .6561.99^2 = .9801.99^3 = .970299.99^4 = .96059601.999^2 = .998001.999^3 = .997002999.999^4 = .996005996001.9999^2 = .99980001.9999^3 = .999700029999.9999^4 = .9996000599960001.99999^2 = .9999800001.99999^3 = .999970000299999.99999^4 = .99996000059999600001.999999^2 = .999998000001.999999^3 = .999997000002999999.999999^4 = .999996000005999996000001.9999999^2 = .99999980000001.9999999^3 = .999999700000029999999.9999999^4 = .9999996000000599999960000001.99999999^2 = .9999999800000001.99999999^3 = .999999970000000299999999.99999999^4 = .99999998000000059999999600000001.999999999^2 = .999999998000000001.999999999^3 = .999999997000000002999999999.999999999^4 = .999999996000000005999999996000000001.9999999999^2 = .99999999980000000001.9999999999^3 = .999999999700000000029999999999.9999999999^4 = .9999999996000000000599999999960000000001.99999999999^2 = .9999999999800000000001.99999999999^3 = .999999999970000000000299999999999.99999999999^4 = .99999999996000000000059999999999600000000001.999999999999^2 = .999999999998000000000001.999999999999^3 = .999999999997000000000002999999999999.999999999999^4 = .999999999996000000000005999999999996000000000001Do not Stop...ZozoZoZo
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 01:45:27 2018 No.9610308 ZOZO
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:01:53 2018 No.9610327 >>9610280Okay this is the last (You) you'll get out of me, then I'll just let the record stand.>Empty sets do not exist, they are the absence of existence.The empty set does exist. The elements of the empty set do not exist. There is a difference. Pretend the set is a box. All the elements of the set are the things in the box. If the box is empty, does that mean the box doesn't exist, or the things inside it don't exist?Maybe you should take another look at that link because nowhere in it does it say "all members of the empty set possess any and indeed all properties." Statements *about* empty sets having any property are true. There is a difference. Implication statements like $P \implies Q$ are true or false, but that doesn't tell you necessarily whether the component statements $P$ and $Q$ are true. I'm not sure why you're so focused on vacuous truths anyway. They have nothing to do with whether every set contains the null set. >Incorrect, as per the above link.How about this link? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditional>>9610280>You said a + 0 = a, not a + O.Again, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Hope this helps!
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:06:11 2018 No.9610333 >>9610181>0.333 is the decimal APPROXIMATION of 1/3.but 0.333... is exactlrn2read
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:11:56 2018 No.9610340 >>9610333post number settles it/thread
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:20:12 2018 No.9610344 >>9610327When you're wrong and you want to run away!The empty set does not exist, there is no box when you are talking about nothing at all.> "Pretend the set is a box" nice job begging the question>Statements *about* empty sets having any property are true.This is what I meant. This idea is nonsensical.>How about this link? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_conditionalThe entire idea that it is only false when P is true and Q false is a result of the idea that the null set is a subset of every set. Again, you have not explained how this is the case. You are claiming that "nothing" is apart of something, when to "be apart" means that it must exist. You are using circular logic.>Again, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. That's fine, I'll take it as admission that you figured out you were wrong. And thus you ran away.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:21:16 2018 No.9610349 >>96103330.333.. is not exact idiot. Exact numbers (and all numbers) terminate. 0.333 does not terminate so it is not an exact number (or a number at all).Infinities don't exist.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:26:07 2018 No.9610353 >>9610280A is a set of all prime numbers which square of is a rational number.I just defined an empty set. It exists just like any other set. The only difference is it has no elements.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:27:22 2018 No.9610355 >>9610353Square root*
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:31:15 2018 No.9610360 File: 429 KB, 466x491, 1512612654479.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9610344I can't even tell if this is bait anymore
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:32:44 2018 No.9610362 >>9610353It does not exist, there are no elements. You've not defined a set, you've merely made a statement.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:33:22 2018 No.9610364 >>9610360I personally believe he is a genuine idiot who thinks he is smart.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:34:50 2018 No.9610367 >>9610362>Boxes do not exist if you don't put anything in them.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:49:35 2018 No.9610378 >>96103491.000...retard
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:51:10 2018 No.9610381 >>9610349>0.333.. is not exactbut it is, it's 1/3
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 02:52:42 2018 No.9610382 >Exact numbers terminate Says who?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 03:27:38 2018 No.9610412 >>9610382a friend of mine, lucilleshe's always right
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 04:05:48 2018 No.9610452 >>9608015>1/3+1/3+1/3=1this is not true
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 04:08:48 2018 No.9610454 >>9607937"0.999..." is not a discrete number, it is an idea, that can only accurately be described by a function. That function has a limit of 1. And mathematics is nothing more than asymmetrical tautology. You don't take issue with:>1 + 1 = 2Do you? And yet the two sides of that equivalency look vastly different.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 05:09:37 2018 No.9610499 >>9610452awww, it's a retard
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 07:20:01 2018 No.9610628 >>9610287ZoZo rules Arithmetic!
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 07:21:36 2018 No.9610632 >>9610499no, he's right, you also need some duct tape or else you're stuck with 3 1/3s
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 07:38:39 2018 No.9610651 File: 34 KB, 473x311, ZOZO rules Arithmetic!.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 08:26:14 2018 No.9610689 >>9610632>it's true if i say it twice
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 08:45:44 2018 No.9610701 File: 678 KB, 1200x758, 1519462627866.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 08:47:11 2018 No.9610702 >>9610689it was a joke, dumbass
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 08:54:56 2018 No.9610717 >>9607937I guess nobody here studies maths...Simple argument for all:10*0.999... = 9.99...9.99... - 0.999... = 99/9 = 1This is what we just did:(10*x - x)/9 = 1Solve for x and you get 1. The equation above is of degree 1 so has at most 1 solution (in any field).Now for the real reason 0.999... = 1:The real numbers are just the completion of the rational numbers; 0.999... is a cauchy sequence 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ... and hence converges to a unique number in the reals. In this case 1.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:07:03 2018 No.9610725 >>9610702>so convincing it was a joke, dumbass
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:08:33 2018 No.9610728 >>9610717>tl;dr$1 = \dfrac{3}{3} = 3 \cdot \dfrac{1}{3} = 3 \cdot 0.\bar{3} = 0.\bar{9}$
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:14:22 2018 No.9610735 >>9608816Well, it's true that infinity isn't really a defined value. 0.0... (with an infinite number of zeroes) 1 is certainly not the same as 0.0... (with an infinite number of zeroes and nothing more.)Indeed, it's an infinitely small value, but 0.0...1 is not equivalent to 0.0...This devolves into the "∞+1 =/= ∞" argument, though. I think the difference between this issue and the ∞+1 is simply that 0.0...1 has a defined difference, and we can kindof pinpoint it after an "infinite number" of zeroes.The arguments for both sides tend to differ based on personal interpretation of an infinite repetition. It's an inherent issue with base 10, as I noted in >>9608586 .Should we switch to duodecimal,1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 without dispute, as:12/3 = 4 (base10)1/3 = 0.4 (base12)0.4 + 0.4 + 0.4 = 1. No infinite repetition, no problems.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:15:46 2018 No.9610737 >>9610725who are you quoting, moron
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:38:14 2018 No.9610766 >>9610735There is no personal interpretation in maths...Saying 0.0... with an infinite number of zeros then a 1 makes absolutely no sense. Neither in maths, nor with respect to any other reasoning.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:38:42 2018 No.9610767 >>9610735>0.0... (with an infinite number of zeroes) 1 is certainly not the same as 0.0...yes it is, that's infinity doing its thing
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 09:48:30 2018 No.9610782 >>9610766>There is no personal interpretation in mathsYes there is, certainly on the cusp of new mathematics
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:04:12 2018 No.9610804 >>9610452Yes, 3/3 ≠ 1
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:08:22 2018 No.9610817 >>9610782Do you have a reference to back that up? Or are you just referring to the axiom of choice?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:24:36 2018 No.9610858 >>9608579what's a real like axiom
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:36:47 2018 No.9610874 >>9608772In the hyperreals it could be $\epsilon$, the smallest number that's greater than 0.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:42:51 2018 No.9610882 File: 316 KB, 1366x768, Screenshot from 2018-03-20 15-07-13.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608861Babies are being born right now who will grow up and start arguing this exact same thing in /sci/ thread #264778921.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 10:54:29 2018 No.9610900 >>9610874Yes, but people are forgetting that almost always this question is brought up because of something they saw off numberfile or in highschool.The question is not framed in a context where the extended or hyperreals come into any sort of merit
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 12:10:48 2018 No.9611032 >>9610882Infantcide is the answer
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 12:14:45 2018 No.9611043 File: 12 KB, 250x250, 1505431316901.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9610452>1=1>not true
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 12:19:28 2018 No.9611055 File: 243 KB, 500x476, muricans.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 12:29:04 2018 No.9611073 File: 735 KB, 1920x1080, 1452035163888.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] This thread is still alive?Hahaha, holy shit! Seriously how fucking bored are you?>Arguing about the axioms of set theory and formal logic with respect to fucking 0.999... = 1Why not post in one of the actual /sci/ threads instead of this meme-fest?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 13:29:03 2018 No.9611192 So no one here is able to refute me? Pathetic. This is what math amounts to when you just let any retard in. I'm getting my PhD this year at a renowned university and I know 0.999 != 1. Yet you retards will believe anything you see on the internet.Infinity is a construction, it has no use other than in approximations. 0.333.. != 1/3, the decimal number 1/3 does not exist. Base 10 doesn't allow it.0.999... also does not exist. Limit does not mean equal, convergence does not mean equal. But go on believing whatever /sci/ tells you and dont listen to a PhD.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 13:33:58 2018 No.9611203 >>9611192I very much doubt you are getting a PhD in mathematics... Do you even know what the real numbers are? It doesn’t seem like it
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 13:58:09 2018 No.9611252 >>9611203I am. And I do. I very much wonder how many people here on /sci/ actually study mathematics if this is the extend of their knowledge. They are not able to think for themselves it seems.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 14:05:59 2018 No.9611273 >>9611252Then you should know that the real numbers are literally just convergent sequences of rational numbers, hence convergence IS equality. How would you justify the existence of pi or e otherwise?Refute this if you can:>>9610717
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 14:53:11 2018 No.9611364 >>9611273>How would you justify the existence of pi or e otherwise?Pi is just another point on the number line. The decimal approximation of Pi being infinite is a flaw of our number system.Decimal Representations != The actual number (in all cases).>Refute this if you can:9.999... - 0.999... us not a valid operation. You're trying to do arithmetic with infinities.I also already told you convergence does not mean equal. It means close to. Just like asymptotes aren't ever reached....But why do I try? /sci/ is for brainlets
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 14:54:16 2018 No.9611367 >>9611364Meant to say (in some* cases)
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 15:13:04 2018 No.9611412 >>9611364>Pi is just another point on the number line ??? Ahahah ok now I KNOW you're not getting a PhD in maths...Define 'infinities'? Never heard the term. Of course it is a valid operation, by your logic pi + pi makes no sense?>I also already told you convergence does not mean equalAnd I already told you that you do not know what the real numbers are clearly. Just look up the definition for christs sake...
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 16:12:26 2018 No.9611562 >>9610287>>9610308>>9610628>>9610651Took awhile Zozo and Zozo is right,Squares of 0.999... yield 0.000...1
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:04:51 2018 No.9611681 >>9610287>>9611562what are you even trying to say here?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:42:50 2018 No.9611731 File: 15 KB, 300x300, 2dd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9611192>So no one here is able to refute me? Pathetic. >the decimal number 1/3 does not exist.>Base 10 doesn't allow it.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:44:52 2018 No.9611735 >>9611192>I'm getting my PhD this year at a renowned university>and I know 0.999 != 1.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:50:13 2018 No.9611745 >>9609746what's the definition of '>'
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:50:32 2018 No.9611746 >>9607937Essential attribute of the real numbers is, that for every two numbers of R that are not equal, there is one in between. However there is no number between 0.999.. and 1.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 17:54:06 2018 No.9611756 >>9611746This idiot doesn't know what real numbers are. This thread should just die.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:00:19 2018 No.9611766 >>9611756Then show me a proof that refutes my statement.For every two elements x, y with x < y of R there is one x' in R so that x < x' < y.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:06:32 2018 No.9611784 >>9611412Just another /sci/tard spouting out whatever he is spoonfed to believepi+pi makes sense.the decimal approximation + the decimal approximation does not make sense unless you terminate the term at some point.Rather than actually showing math skills, you show your ignorance.>>9611731its true, 0.333... does not exist, numbers terminate. 1/3 is different than 0.333...>>9611735?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:13:03 2018 No.9611805 >>9611784Ok you're just a troll.Nothing you've said so far has any mathematical backing, you're just stating things which simply are not true without even attempting to explain them. You know nothing of basic foundations of mathematics, so I can deduce that you're probably some computer science student who knows some basic linear algebra and thinks he's a mathematician all of a sudden
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:42:35 2018 No.9611873 >>9611766I agree. I was talking about OP. Not you.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:45:35 2018 No.9611880 >>96080150.333... is an approximation of 1/3. 10 cannot be divided into 3 exactly, which is you get 0.333... The each 3 is another additional one being divided by 3. The true redpill is that base 12 is superior.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:48:28 2018 No.9611887 >>9611784If the 'decimal approximation' you keep referring to terminates, then the number is just a rational number. However, we are talking about the real numbers. The real numbers are the completion of the rational numbers. This means that every element in the reals IS a cauchy sequence! This is just the definition! It is really basic dude...For example, the sequence (3, 3.1, 3.14, 3.141,...) is cauchy and we call it pi for short. If you write 0.999... it refers to the cauchy sequence (0.9, 0.99, 0.999,...). This sequence is equivalent to the sequence (1,1,1,...) because they converge!Now we can define addition on these sequences in the obvious way: pi + pi = (3 + 3, 3.1 + 3.1, 3.14 + 3.14,...). And also 10 * 0.999... = (10*0.9, 10*0.99, + 10*0.999,...) = (9, 9.9, 9.99, 9.999,...).Just read this please: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_metric_space
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:52:29 2018 No.9611892 >>9611805Right, I'm the troll. Not the guy who just states the same things again and again without refuting anything.Ok wise guy, go ahead and explain how to add every single infinite digit of the decimal representation in pi into a solid non terminating number. O.O what is that? You can't? It just goes on?? Why is this!? Could it be that, maybe, just maybe, the decimal approximation is just... that? A decimal approximation? That pi cant be accurately represented in its entirety using our written system!?Dumb troll. You're still walking around talking as if infinity is a real thing without having ever proved it. "Yea guys really, I really did add every single term in this infinite sequence! I did! I didn't just get close to the answer, I got to the answer!!"^You
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 18:54:07 2018 No.9611899 >>9611887Nice sleight of hand. Convergence does not make them equivalent. If you wanted to "plot" 0.999, it would have an asymptote at 1.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:00:17 2018 No.9611919 >>9611899No, if you wanted to plot 0.9, 0.99, 0.999, 0.9999, ..... and so on it would have an asymptote at 1. 0.9999.... is infinite, it never terminates so it is 1 you fucking fool.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:00:26 2018 No.9611920 >>9611899Convergence does make them equivalent, that is how the real numbers are defined. It's like talking to plank of wood.How would you define the real numbers? I am genuinely curious. It seems to me that you are essentially saying that the real numbers don't exist because you can't write most of them down.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:09:51 2018 No.9611949 >>9611735Is it in Gender Studies?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:10:01 2018 No.9611951 >>9607937Oh hey it's this guy again. He will just keep bitching about how you can't complete an infinite amount of operations and therefore infinity makes no sense all the while ignoring that he's switching between different instances of the concept infinity at will when it suits him and also ignoring the actual mathematical definitions in favor of his intuition. Shockingly, this leads to contradictions and because his one view of infinity is clearly broken, all views/definitions of infinity must also be broken.
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:14:10 2018 No.9611961 >>9611192>no one is able to refute me>getting my phd in math>also I don't know how infinity or real numbers work>but I-I'm really good at math and I say you bakas are all wrong!!!! XDliterally retarded
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:22:31 2018 No.9611974 >>9607937>math using infinity does not exist, it is all flawedIt does exist. Infinity goes on forever because we can always add more 0s. Things get infinitesimally small. Space is expanding
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:35:04 2018 No.9611995 >>9607937>Also... math using infinity does not exist, it is all flawed. Calculus is an approximation.Yep.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/infinity.html
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 19:45:43 2018 No.9612015 File: 22 KB, 1047x171, IMG_20180322_194520.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608478Who did this?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 22:19:27 2018 No.9612320 >>9611681your ignorance is your problem not minehave no interest in educating you sorry
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 22:26:24 2018 No.9612328 >>9607937>How can retards on this board actually believe that 0.999... = 1? If it was equal to 1, you would just write 1. Also... math using infinity does not exist, it is all flawed. Calculus is an approximation. As well... the null set is not a subset of every step. To have no properties is not a property. Vacuous truths do not exist, they are just insanity.everyone knows these truths so why bother?
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 22:44:58 2018 No.9612380 >>9611192>conveniently ignores >>9608177
 >> Anonymous Thu Mar 22 22:48:45 2018 No.9612388 File: 15 KB, 226x239, 96cb66ecf4d671aa52b80682d90ad714dd3573f36ae1c0086baad40d232d13d3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...Literally learned why .999=1 in precalc btw.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 07:43:14 2018 No.9613015 >>9611920No, they exist but you can't write them down in decimal form. You can use notation to refer to them.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 07:57:46 2018 No.9613035 >>9607937Copy and pasted from somewherehttps://pastebin.com/LrPMrZR9
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 08:08:11 2018 No.9613050 >>9612388>Literally learned why .999=1 in precalc btw.You certainly didn't.Before having understood the definition of the real numbers you can't really know why that is actually true.Most """"""""""proofs"""""""""" posted here are inherently wrong.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 08:17:32 2018 No.9613054 >>9613050>math is wrong because I say so>but also I have a phd in math
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 08:48:59 2018 No.9613104 >>9608036>There is no addition going on here. It is a single element.0.999... is constructed by the infinite sum of 9/(10^n) so not only is there addition involved, there are an infinite number of terms.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 09:17:22 2018 No.9613141 >>9613035the formal proof from wikipedia 0.999... is all you neednobody ever touches that one because they can't
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 12:39:03 2018 No.9613398 File: 30 KB, 941x522, What do you mean i always have a remainder.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>96080150.333... is not equal to 1/3
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 12:42:36 2018 No.9613402 $0 \rightarrow \infty = \overbrace{\underbrace{0,1,2,3,4,\cdots}_{\infty \text{ elements of } \mathbb{R}}, \underbrace{\infty}_{\text{not in } \mathbb{R}}}^{\text{all possible elements}} \\ \text{Mapped between 0.9 and 1} \\ 0.9 \rightarrow 1 = \overbrace{\underbrace{0.9, 0.99, 0.999, 0.9999, \cdots}_{\infty \space \mathbb{R} \text{ elements of the map}}, \underbrace{1}_{\text{not in the }\mathbb{R}\text{ map}} }^{\text{all possible elements}}$ If there exists a value to bridge the gap between 0.999... and 1 thus allowing 0.999... = 1, there also exists a value to bridge the gap between real numbers and infinity, thus allowing infinity to be equal to a real number. If there exists no value to bridge the gap between 0.999... and 1 thus assuming 0.999... = 1, there also exists no value to bridge the gap between real numbers and infinity, thus assuming infinity to be equal to a real number.Because the value does not actually exist and infinity cannot be reached, there is no possible value to add to 0.999... to make it reach 1; it will never reach 1. No amount of increments in the reals will reach infinity, so no mapped amount of increments between 0 and 1 will reach 1. 0.999... is not "infinitely close" to 1. It is actually infinitely far away from 1. Any arithmetic that shows 0.999... = 1 is therefore flawed by making inconsistent and mistaken assumptions about the construction of a repeating decimal extended from a poor interpretation and implementation of infinity, because infinity has classically always been poorly interpreted and implemented.$0.\bar{9} \neq 1$
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 12:45:26 2018 No.9613406 >>9613398How much bigger is 1/3 compared to 0.333...?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 12:51:08 2018 No.9613417 >>9613406Not a relevant question. How much bigger is infinity compared to 10 or $10^{10000}$?Its the same distance from both of them.0.999... isn't imperically "closer" to 1 than 0.01 is.You dont go around saying 0.01 = 1, do you?Numbers do not have distance. They are numbers.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 13:03:09 2018 No.9613441 >>9613402None of those finite elements map to 0.999... so your entire argument is irrelevant.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 13:03:29 2018 No.9613443 >>9607937implying infinity isn't just -1/12.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 13:19:44 2018 No.9613489 >>9613402Nice formatting, bad post.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 13:47:35 2018 No.9613564 >>9613402Just read the wikipedia page on the real numbers; you clearly do not know what they are.Your argument makes no sense. All you are doing is counting a subset of the real numbers between 0.9 and 1, and of course the map doesn't reach 1... The real numbers are uncountable, so there are infinitely many such maps. You have not presented an argument.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 15:17:47 2018 No.9613768   $\sum_{k=1}^{n}\frac{9}{10^{k}}=\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}\left ( 1-\frac{1}{10^{n}} \right )=1-\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{10^{n}}=1-0=1$
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 15:46:36 2018 No.9613845 File: 112 KB, 953x613, 1471355146644.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 15:57:55 2018 No.9613874 >>9613104No, 0.999... does not exist, retard.>>9613054>Math is not built on faulty assumptions that don't hold up to scrutiny
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 16:20:12 2018 No.9613929 >>9613874seek help
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 16:21:30 2018 No.9613932 >>9613417>Not a relevant questionKEK
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 16:54:40 2018 No.9614022 >>9613874>.999 doesn’t existHow retarded are you?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 17:00:10 2018 No.9614040 >>9607937*laughs in basic recurring decimal => fraction algebra*$x=0.\dot9$$10x=9.\dot9$$9x= 10x-x = 9.\dot9-0.\dot9=9$$9x=9$$x=1$$\therefore 0.\dot9=1$
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 17:02:18 2018 No.9614047 >>9607937>engineers/thread
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 17:04:21 2018 No.9614052 >>9608036>1/3 does not equal 0.333...holy shit now THIS is uncharted territorygood thread, OP
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 18:02:11 2018 No.9614176 Can the mods just ban these threads already? What a fucking waste of space and effort.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 18:27:37 2018 No.9614226 >>9614022No one said .999 doesn't exist you autist. .999 unending does not exist. Numbers are concrete. The average intelligence of a /sci/ poster must be that of a middle schooler.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 18:29:34 2018 No.9614234 >>9611192nice b8,>0.333... != 1/3wrong, they are two different kinds of notation which correspond to the same real number.>limit does not mean equalno you're correct, but limits do exist in a mathematical sense, without them we wouldn't have analysis.dedekind complete fields like the real numbers imply that all rational cauchy sequences have real limits.the cauchy sequence 0, 0.9, 0.99, 0.999, has a limit 0.999..., this is the definition of the number you call 0.999...but 0.999.. also has limit 1, via the epsilon delta definition of a limit.so this cauchy sequence has limit 0.999.. and 1.the real numbers are also defined as equivalence classes of cauchy sequences, thus 0.999... = 1 by definition.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 18:36:26 2018 No.9614256 >>9614226.999... is concrete, real, well defined, whatever you want to call it
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 18:41:40 2018 No.9614272 >>9607937x=0,999...10x=9,999...10x-x=99x=9x=1
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 22:42:12 2018 No.9614936 >>9613441Honestly, the irony of your post...
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 22:48:42 2018 No.9614955 1/3 > 0.31/3 > 0.331/3 > 0.3331/3 > 0.3333Continue unendingly1/3 > 0.333...
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 22:54:12 2018 No.9614972 >>9607937They can believe it because they are "retarded" enough to understand elementary calculus. You may as well try to argue that 5+5 doesn't equal 10 because "DUUUUUUUUUR if it equaled ten then just write ten".
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 22:58:08 2018 No.9614984 >>9614936OK, so which finite element maps to 0.999...?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 22:59:28 2018 No.9614989 File: 252 KB, 797x497, Screenshot_2018-03-21-04-56-10-1-1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9614972$0.\bar{9}$ is not an equation........................ $_{\text{fuckin' retard}}$
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:02:35 2018 No.9614997 >>9614989Neither is 5+5, but that doesn't mean it doesn't equal 10
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:03:41 2018 No.9614999 >>9614984You're literally describing something that exists but you're somehow confused cause you're too busy still trying to pretend there is justification for 0.999...=1You have the answer you need, dude.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:05:50 2018 No.9615005 File: 30 KB, 481x425, 1514070409979.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9614999>5+5 is not an equation
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:06:21 2018 No.9615007 >>9611055That picture is fake news. A&W was so butt-blasted at their failure of a product that they blamed the American public instead of their own incompetence.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:08:11 2018 No.9615010 >>9615005Are you saying 5+5 is an equation?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:08:56 2018 No.9615011 >>9611364>Pi being infinite is a flaw in the number system.Retard, it would be infinite in EVERY number system because it's a transcendental number. Leave the nigger-tier diploma mill that you're buying your PhD from and attend a real college.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:13:53 2018 No.9615019 >>9614989This entire argument is over the truth or falsehood of the equation .999...=1Don't accuse me of having a higher IQ than you.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:16:28 2018 No.9615024 >>9615019Literally do not even know what an equation is how the fuck did you even navigate to this website.4=5 is not a fucking equation.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:17:57 2018 No.9615031 >>96150244=5 is an equation
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:19:08 2018 No.9615035 >>9615024You are ok?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:19:09 2018 No.9615036 File: 9 KB, 211x239, 1513971000563.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9615031>5+5 is not an equation>4=5 is an equation
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:21:02 2018 No.9615040 >>9615036Are you literally retarded?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:25:01 2018 No.9615043 File: 16 KB, 498x467, 1512340128839.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9615040>Are you literally retarded?Is that a... STATEMENT?or..an EQUATION?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:27:08 2018 No.9615047 >>9615043So you really think 5+5 is an equation, and 4=5 is not?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:29:27 2018 No.9615051 >>9615043All equations are statements btw
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:30:36 2018 No.9615053 >>9615047You think 0.999... = 1 and infinity is a rational number, llus you don't even know basic arithmetic terminology so, ya kow who cares. We dont need to have a conversation and I'm personally not interested in one, cause you're clearly nutty and illogical.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:33:54 2018 No.9615059 >>9615053Is this you? >>9613402
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:34:27 2018 No.9615060 >>9615051With self assurance confidence like that, you could shopt yourself in the head and go straight to heaven so long as you really believed it, right?Whats wrong? Too chicken?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:36:15 2018 No.9615066 >>9615053Can you just explain how 5+5 is an equation? Without just quoting me and posting a brainlet meme
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:37:49 2018 No.9615069 >>9615066Can you explain why you cant use google?Without just arbitrarily replying to me with annoyances.
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:39:53 2018 No.9615079 >>9615069I did, nothing came up
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:42:00 2018 No.9615085 >>9615069Is this the right path?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:49:20 2018 No.9615102 >>9614999So which finite element maps to 0.999...?
 >> Anonymous Fri Mar 23 23:51:31 2018 No.9615109 >>9614999So none of the finite elements map to 0.999... because they all map to a finite amount of 9s. That leaves us with infinity, which maps to.... 1. Hoisted by your own petard.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:01:20 2018 No.9615132 >>9615102You're replying to the guy that thinks 5+5 is an equation
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:01:48 2018 No.9615133 >>9614955finite isn't infinite
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:03:32 2018 No.9615139 >>9615133Exactly, you just proved my point
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:05:36 2018 No.9615147 >>96151330.999... is infinite1 is finite
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:20:23 2018 No.9615175 >>9615139infinite reaches 1finite doesn't
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:20:33 2018 No.9615176 >>9615109Congrats.1 maps to infinity.Yes.P.S. you can't reach infinity. By default, it is out of bounds.0.999... =/= 1
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:29:08 2018 No.9615189 >>9615176>>9615109More poignantly for you, the repitition of $0.\bar{n}$ or 0.nnn.... doesn't actually mean "infinite".Infinity can't be reached. The repitition only invokes an arbitrary but definitely finite amount, since you know, you can't "have", in totality, an infinite thing.>>9613402>Any arithmetic that shows 0.999... = 1 is therefore flawed by making inconsistent and mistaken assumptions about the construction of a repeating decimal extended from a poor interpretation and implementation of infinityThis was already layed out for you.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:30:09 2018 No.9615192 >>9615176monkeys reach for bananasmonkeys don't understand infinity
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:36:13 2018 No.9615203 >>9615189That's how it's defined. You are just saying that the definition is not the definition. This is a non-mathematical argument and thus can be ignored.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:37:01 2018 No.9615207 >>9615192Humans lie.Humans pretend to understand infinity.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:37:47 2018 No.9615209 >>9615207wanna bananna?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:41:10 2018 No.9615217 >>9615209wanna lie?can't even go a minute without lying to yourself that anyone smarter than you is "just a monkey".Once you start getting high on your own supply, you cross a painful event horizon.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 00:52:13 2018 No.9615235 All these fucking high schoolers and undergrads arguing about bullshit.Approximations make the world work.We build our world with definitions. If we choose to make a definition than it will be so.If you're doing research or work where this definition matters that that's one thing. But I know all you faggots arguing here are in fact NOT working on related research or projects that this definition, either way, will have any bearing.Fucking brainlet faggots.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:02:23 2018 No.9615249 >>9615235So do you think 0.999... equals 1?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:10:36 2018 No.9615259
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:12:12 2018 No.9615260 >>9615217look who's talking
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:31:28 2018 No.9615277 File: 170 KB, 657x527, 1518243595834.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9613050>Before having understood the definition of the real numbersYou didn't learn the definition of real numbers in pre-calc? Dude... Are you like 14 or something?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:33:51 2018 No.9615279 >>9609270sweet, you proved .999... = 1 - (1/10)^inf, what's next?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:37:39 2018 No.9615280 File: 120 KB, 555x143, x.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:39:28 2018 No.9615282 >>9608745of course it isn't, it's real number(s).
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:41:18 2018 No.9615285 >>96087450.000....1 = 0.0... = 0
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 01:49:27 2018 No.9615299 >>9607937>math using infinity does not existThen 0.999... can't exist, so it must be 1.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 02:01:54 2018 No.9615315 >>9615299Wow, you are even more retarded than people who think 0.999... != 1
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 02:18:24 2018 No.9615332 File: 3 KB, 635x223, r8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9615315nope, he's really retarded, but the deniers are infinitely retarded
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 03:44:42 2018 No.9615430 >>9607937holy shit the number of replies>keeping all the brainlets of the board in one threadyou're doing god's work anon
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 03:58:45 2018 No.9615451 >>9615259>the set of all real numbers is larger than any finite set>the set of all even real numbers is smaller than the set of all real numbers, and also greater than any finite setFalseCan't count to infinity. Higher Math = literal brain damage
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:13:59 2018 No.9615475 File: 561 KB, 625x626, Bait.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9607937Watch your mouth, fuck-person.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:18:23 2018 No.9615486 >>9615332but infinity doesnt exist so their'yre only 1 retarded
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:35:56 2018 No.9615509 >>9615451So by your logic there are finite sets bigger than the set of even numbers or real numbers?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:40:23 2018 No.9615514 File: 7 KB, 420x420, b36.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] Okay infininiggersIf you're so smart, solve this problem:Construct ∞ without invoking the words "infinity" or "infinite" or any related word or term derived from them, and you may also not use the symbol ∞ outside of your conclusion.Show all your work, be thorough.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:41:53 2018 No.9615518 >>9615509By the only logic there is, you cannot count to infinity. Infinity doesn't exist the way you think it does.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:41:58 2018 No.9615519 >>9607937>Vacuous truths do not existJesus christ you're like a black belt nihilist
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:43:55 2018 No.9615521 >>9615514The cardinality of the set of all real numbers
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:46:03 2018 No.9615526 >>9615519Nihilism is a lack of caring, much like the lack of caring to make certain. A broken clock is right twice a day under vacuous thinking, yet in reality if all you had was a broken clock without reference, it would never be right. Cause its broken.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:47:41 2018 No.9615529 >>9615521That is just an arbitrarily large and vague number. If you're confident with that answer, congrats, you now have what the rest of the world calls a variable.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:51:08 2018 No.9615531 File: 66 KB, 554x400, 1473433322140.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9615521How many real numbers are there thou?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 04:52:11 2018 No.9615533 >>9615531ten
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 07:10:12 2018 No.9615678 >>9615531$\aleph_1$
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 08:36:30 2018 No.9615757 >>9615514https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=infinityAn unbounded quantity that is greater than every real number.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 08:52:59 2018 No.9615788 >>9607937nice b8
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 09:23:41 2018 No.9615850 What is 0.888... equal to?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 10:02:36 2018 No.9615911 >>96158508/9
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 11:55:01 2018 No.9616115 >>9615678Aleph is a term derived from infinity, requiring infinity alreasy had been properly constructed and defined. Can't use it aleph!
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 11:56:24 2018 No.9616119 >>9616115wohoo shitposter has spoken
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 11:56:51 2018 No.9616121 >>9615518So are there finite sets bigger than the set of even numbers?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:05:26 2018 No.9616146 $\frac{1}{9} \stackrel{>}{\neq} 0.\bar{1} \\ \frac{1}{9} × 9 = \frac{9}{9} = 1 \\ 0.\bar{1} × 9 = 0.\bar{9} \\ \frac{9}{9} \neq 0.\bar{9} \\ \frac{9}{9} = 1 \\ \frac{1}{9} \neq 0.\bar{1} \\ \frac{1}{9} \neq \text{ any decimal} \\ \frac{1}{9} > 0.\bar{1}$
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:07:33 2018 No.9616147 File: 316 KB, 600x908, 1507698139409.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report] >>9616121Theres a bigger set than any set. All sets are finite.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:19:45 2018 No.9616182 >>9616147So what finite set is bigger than the set of even numbers?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:21:29 2018 No.9616190 >>9616121The set of all real numbers you believe you're properly referencing is actually being confused. The set of all real numbers is only arbitrarily large, vague, and undefined.Furthermore, SetA is all real numbers, SetB is all even real numbers. Both sets start empty, and will be filled. Every elememt of the Sets is cardinally indexed.We inject an element into each set until they are filled. Because infinity cannot be reached, there exists no number infinity/2 that would have been the utmost largest value in the set of evens. Instead, both the set of evens and set of alls grow at the same rate and are of equal size. If left to grow indefinitely, unmeasureably, they would both be equal in size yet infinite.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:24:53 2018 No.9616200 >>9616190So subtracting the infinite set of evens from the infinite set of alls leaves the infinite set of odds. $\infty - \infty = \infty$AKA this thing called infinity is literally worthless in real life.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:31:21 2018 No.9616220 >>9616200>says shitposter with no real life
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 12:40:21 2018 No.9616254 >>9616220ironic when I can't die :^)
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 13:24:26 2018 No.9616335 >>9616182the set of your shitposts, sinceeveryone agrees they're fucking ODD
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 13:45:54 2018 No.9616393 >>9616335What?
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 13:50:02 2018 No.9616400 I am the number 0.Everyone hates the number 1.0 is not 1.Everyone argues that 0 is 1.Everyone argues that I am the number 1.Even though I am the number 0.Maybe the number 0 can increment to the number 1.Maybe I could become the number 1.But maybe I was just always going to be the number 0.Instead, everyone has treated me as if I would increment to the number 1.Everyone treats me as if I had already incremented to the number 1.Yet I remain the number 0.People don't hate the number 1.People just hate everything.Regardless if I'm a 0 or a 1, people will hate me.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 14:32:37 2018 No.9616531
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 19:51:44 2018 No.9617387 >>96079379*0.3=2,7 9*0.33=2,97 9*0.333=2,997 The more 3's you have the closer you get to 3 so if you have and infinite amout of 3's the difference is 0.So that means 9*0.333...=9*1/3 Cut 9 on both sides and we get 0.333... = 1/3 Time 3 on both sides and we get 0.999... = 1 >hurr durr infinity does not exist This is math not physics. It doesn't have to physically exist to be real.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 20:37:43 2018 No.9617457 >>9617387it doesn't exist conceptually either, infinite processes are never completed. And even if we were to assume that it did "complete" (whatever that means, as its not well defined), it would still be 1/inf off of 1.
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 21:23:40 2018 No.9617571 >>9617457>completed>he thinks it's a pogo stickKEK
 >> Anonymous Sat Mar 24 21:45:28 2018 No.9617627 >>9615514Fuck you and your shifting of the burden of proof. If infinity doesn't exist, then there cannot be an infinite number of natural numbers. Since the cardinality of the natural numbers isn't infinite, there exists a largest integer. What is it? PROVE your claims.
>>