9.999.... =10 prove me wrong pic unrelated

9.999.... =10 prove me wrong pic unrelated

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/TINfzxSnnIE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Well, if 0.333... = 1/3, I don't see anything wrong with 0.999.. = 10

sure.
that is an equal sign, which means it's the same value on both sides.
9.999 is missing 0.001 in order to be the same as 10 which makes the two numbers unequal and therefore it's not correct to use the equals sign

1/3 is 0.23 so 2/3 is 0,34 you must be wrong.

it's 0.999... meaning it goes on forever, so in theory it's equal to 1

geometric series

10÷3= 3.333....
3.333...×3=9.999...
Therefore 9.999...=10

I mean 9.999... of course

>in theory
what about in reality?

.333 does not equal 1/3.

take it to you filthy animal

Math is completely independent of reality.

definitely in reality. can you think of an application where .9999 repeating wouldn't be as good as exactly 1? there is no possible tolerance in reality for it to not be perfectly true.

he says .333... is equal to 1/3
.333... being .3 repeating
which is equal to 1/3

>.333...
>333...
>33...
>3...
>...

op is a fag

he's also right

I'm gonna bully all of you faggots.

................................................

Okay so what about this,
Let's call 9.999.. B
So b=9.999...
B×10=99.999...
10b-b=90 so that's 9b
9b÷9 is 10

Find a flaw...

no, in theory it gets closer and closer to 1 forever but never actually reaches it
look up "limits" or learn about it in calculus
and stop making these dumb fucking threads

>itt people treating infinity as a number

Morons.

Yeah it wasn't based on anything like reality. And it can't be applied in reality either.
So I guess you're right

no but I don't see how appliance is really relevant here

1/3=.3333333...
2/3=.6666666...
3/3=.9999999...=1

Q.E.D. bitches

I asked dad who's like really good at math and he said that 9.999... isn't the same as 10

Hey my dad works at Nintendo

Kill yourself please.

...

yfw you realize that a base-10 number system will inherently have difficulty expressing some numbers but that still won't change the fundamental nature of quantities.

fuck off with your stupid bait

It can be approximately applied in reality what the hell do you think we have been doing for the last couple thousand years.

but 1/3 isn't actually equal to .3...
it just gets more accurate as you add 3's

so 2/3 isn't actually equal to .6...

and 3/3 isn't equal to .9..

3/3 is simply 1

9.999.... exists only in meth

>good at arithmetic*
FTFY

I know and understand the logic and thinking behind this. But think of it this way
Have you ever heard the theory of whoever the fuck it was who was a really great runner. And this random dude challenged him to a 100m race on one condition, that the good runner guy could only take steps half as long as his previous one. So in the end he could never even get to the finish line

saying 9.999.... = 10 is like saying they both got to the finish line, except one of them only got infinitely close and in reality couldn't possibly get there.

It's because it's impossible with the mathematic system we use to divide 10 into 3 equal parts

x = 0.999...
10x = 9.999...
10x - x = 9x
9.999. - 0.999. = 9
x = 1

because woman =animals
nice

why proving you wrong when you are right

>approximately
>it's the same

chose one

never said it was the same but it can be applied in reality.

/thread

yeah, approximately

you can't split 10 into 3 equal parts. which is why you have to continue into infinity
You're infinitely close, but you won't quite get there

So sure, in theory

You be thinking about my man Achilles. And my man Zeno. And all those other guys.

I mean, you're simplifying just a little too much, but, yeah.

checked, rekt

your mathematical answer right here

Yeah over simplified, couldn't even name 1 person in the story. but this guy got it
Guess it's kind of getting the point across

Idiots you cant multilply that shit

This is the simplest proof.

When you add a "..." to the end of a repeating decimal it's implied that the repeating digit repeats forever, meaning that 1/3 does equal .33333...

I dunno why this samefag keeps pretending he's making a valid point

Its easy to prove wrong, just look at the symbols. They are clearly totally different from each other. If they were truely equal it would be:

10 = 10

OR

9.999... = 9.999...

They simply aren't the same.

Yeah, adding decimals to get as close to a third as possible.
But it still won't change the fact that it's not really a third, even if it's super close

you idiot

In an endless sequence of .99's, you're always an endless sequense of .01 short of reaching 1. This endless .01 could mean the difference on a supersubatomic level, and could even be the sole reason someone gets cancer or a sun collapsing under it's own gravity.

The endless .01 means a difference at some point, a butterfly can start a tornado with the flap of its feeble .01 wings.

Ever heard of Occam's razor? I've clearly demonstrated they aren't identical.

that doesn't mean .333... is = to 1/3
it just gets closer infinitely to 1/3 but never actually reaches 1/3

So do you just not understand the concept of infinity at all, or...

in math you can split ten into 3 equal parts. 10/3. In reality the number 10 is an artefact of the units used. so 10 feet/3 =10/3 feet =3.333... feet which you would say is "infinitely close but not quite there" (which btw is fucking meaningless) but 120 inches/3=40 inches doesn't have that problem which is absurd since they are the exact same thing.
Analogously the fact that 1/3 can't be expressed as a finite decimal is just due to our base, 10.
This is too stupid to be anything but an act. Nice try /sci/.

>repeat forever
>does equal
>forever
>repeat
>ends yet repeats forever
Can you quantify .33333... for me, without implying a range (like the number 3)?

Clearly, you don't understand the concept of finite things, or the difference between a finite and infinite set of things.

The fact you can't do anything but use name calling just further proves my point. They aren't the same.

well, you have to keep adding decimals infinitely. And for each decimal you add, you only get closer to a third.
You will never get to a third
And if you have to keep adding to a number, then it's not the same number

Oh, no no no no. Hold your horsie, bait user.

That doesn't prove shit. It just means that there's name-calling.

>ITT people thinking infinity can be defined as a number
>.333... doesn't equal 1/3 you fucking inbreds

>ITT people who can't into theoretical maths.

Your argument is based off the assumption that there's always going to be room a .000...1 to follow the .9999... to make 10.

You do not understand the concept of infinity. Infinity goes on forever, there is nowhere to put that extra .01 because there will always be another .9 to put before it. The nines are infinite, they go on forever. There will never be a .1

I said "further" proves my point. The proof itself is right there in the comment, they aren't the same.

The question you should be asking is, if they aren't the same then how are they different?

>ends
where did you get ends from? Are you unfamiliar with the concept of a limit? The fact that we can assign a value to an infinite summation?
>explicitly uses the "The Object is its Representation" meme
>expects me to take him seriously.

It goes on forever, it is, in no way, equal to 10. 10=10. 1/sin=csc. 3/4=.75. 9.9999999..........................=/=10, if rounding, it APPROXIMATES to 10, that is only rounding, not actual equality. Not even slightly. Math, even if it's abstract in concepts, numbers, themselves are concrete. 10 only equals 10. Don't be a jackass.

oh, but it does.

My assumption proves that. I state that in the 0.99.. sequence, there will always be a missing 0.00...1 to make it whole. And I tried to show the importance of that missing 0.00..1 by calling for supersubatomic physics

You are correct. Let's say 9.999... is X
X÷10 is 0.999...
With this we can take away the recurring places therefore 9/10 X Is equal to 9
9÷(9÷10) is equalocated to X as well as 10

O wait I get you now

>trying to prove something in maths by making up bullshit physics

Any two non equal numbers have an average that is not equal to any one of the original numbers.
1+0.999...=1.999...
1.999.../2=0.999...

Any questions? Every number has two valid representations, one being the simple elementary one and the other this endless 999... bullshit. Same fucking number.

The importance of one particle should not be underestimated.

Isn't this the same as infinity +1?

>I don't actually know what occam's razor means but I'm going to mention it in an Internet arguement so I sound like I know what I'm talking about

because infinite doesn't exist as produced by a tailor machine, then it doesn't exist logically. But you can assule it dods exist, but I bet you it's false ;)

Itt: grade 3 math skills

1/3 can be seen as a never ending number. It only ends if you would say the end is a 4
Cus later:
0.333 x 3 = 0.999
1/3 x 3 = 1
0.334 x 3 = 1.012 (

We already had hat earlier retards

MATH DOES NOT DERIVE FROM REALITY

1 stands for 1 whole.

0.9999.... stands for slightly not 1 whole

Case closed

...

Math does derive from counting sheep! Don't make them leave, I only know multiplicaton and addition at first,!

So disprove it.

truley genious

Everybody watch this and shut the fuck up

youtu.be/TINfzxSnnIE

You have it backwards, I'm saying the representation is the object. How can I take you seriously if you can't understand something that simple?

Oh but I do know what it means and my answer is the most simple and correct.

>not understanding that this is exactly what I meant

>can you represent an infinite number for me without implying that it's a range (infinite)
>greentext with contradictory concepts
>states that someone doesn't understand the difference (non-similarity) between the two things

Probably bait.

See the above.

I got end from >to the end of a repeating decimal
>a repeating decimal
>...
>implied that the repeating digit repeats forever, as in, it does not stop repeating and does not ever become another number

There cannot exist an end for something that has to, by definition, continue for the total amount of any given time in which the system occupies. That can't be observed. Only assumed.

A limit tends to imply that there is a point at which a discernible observation can be made on the set of values. An "end", if you will. Something of infinite summation can be assigned any sort of value- the problem arises when you're trying to be 1.0, not .99999.... accurate on where, or what, that limit is

"In mathematics, 'infinity' is often treated as if it were a number (i.e., it counts or measures things: "an infinite number of terms") but it is not the same sort of number as natural or real numbers."

So, you tell me what I'm getting wrong here according to the mean consensus.

I'm pretty sure he just phrased it wrong.

Lol where does it derive from then? God? The human mind?

Either way math has to have some connection to the real world and I don't see the problem in using that connection to prove the importance of an extremely small difference. Particles make for a good example if you ask me.

Good bait, but I'm not taking it unless you provide something more substantial to go along with it.

Hey, fine by me, Achilles.

Faggots don't even know trigonometry. It only approaches 10, infinitely. The difference is infinitely smaller and smaller, so for all intents and purposes, it's 10. Does not = 10 tho.

.999... can't be substituted for x because .999 isn't a real number

how is it bait if its a mathematical technique used to convert recurring decimals into fractions?
looks like someones feeling a little down today

we have used mathematical formulae to prove 1=0.999...
Yet you kids keep coming back complaining, but not even trying to prove anything.
Wymyn's studies? Arts major? Get the fuck out of here!

/thread

I can't even parse what the first sentence means.
The formal definition of a limit doesn't use infinity at all.
A limit does not imply an end.
Math is simply the fact that if you assume a set of statements are true (axioms or postulates) then you can prove some other statements (theorems). I don't it has to derive from anything. The mathematical truths are true whether or not it is written down or even conceived of.
simply ebin

Mathematics is a human concept created in an attempt to explain, calculate and predict the nature of the universe surrounding us. Just because something works mathematically doesnt necessary mean that there is a real-world equivalent.

If I wanted to kill myself, I'd climb to the number of your chromosomes and jump to your IQ.

Just read what you're saying.

Does A equal B just because it get's so close to it? If my dick shrinks into my body, does that at some point mean I have a pussy?

9.999...=n
0.1n=0.999... (n is ÷ by 10)
n - 0.1n = 9.999... - 0.999...
=9
0.9n =9
0.9n÷0.9 (this is 1n)= 9÷0.9 = 10
Therefore n = 10 and 9.999...

goddamn the american schooling system.