I thought calculus was a robot in the cartoon "Futurama"?
oh wait that was calculon...sorry
This thread has gone clear over my noggin!
Upvote
0
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
I thought calculus was a robot in the cartoon "Futurama"?
oh wait that was calculon...sorry
This thread has gone clear over my noggin!
I think it's something like this.
0.9999... Isn't one, if it was one, it would be 1.
It is however a very close approximation of one.
It is not one simply because there is ALWAYS a remainder.
Add 0.0001 to 0.9999 and you get 1 just as if it were to any decimal point or infinity.
Factually, accurately 0.9999... Will never and can never be one it can only be approximated to be one. Imo.
0.9999... Isn't one, if it was one, it would be 1.
It is however a very close approximation of one.
It is not one simply because there is ALWAYS a remainder.
Add 0.0001 to 0.9999 and you get 1 just as if it were to any decimal point or infinity.
Factually, accurately 0.9999... Will never and can never be one it can only be approximated to be one. Imo.
Upvote
0
No, it is one. 0.999... is an infinite series, specifically a geometric series with r=1/10 and a=9, represented as jhawkkw posted in his handwritten proof. The sum of a geometric series with 0 < r < 1 is a/(1 - r). If you disregard the 0th term, as .9999...requires you to do (because it's .9999... not 9.9999...) , the series sums to a/(1-r) - a. Substitute the values in, 9/(1-(1/10) ) - 9 = 1.
If you haven't had calculus, you may not be able to come to grips with the fact that a sum of an infinite number of finite terms may in fact converge to a real, finite number. It's still true though.
Upvote
0
It's really counter intuitive. Before having university classes on that matter, I didn't believe it either. But yeah, I still think that the best way to explain it (without it getting complicated) is this one:
1 = 1
(3/3) = 1
(1/3) + (1/3) + (1/3) = 1
0.3333... + 0.333... + 0.33333... = 1
0.9999... = 1
There's no approximation anywhere in there.
1 = 1
(3/3) = 1
(1/3) + (1/3) + (1/3) = 1
0.3333... + 0.333... + 0.33333... = 1
0.9999... = 1
There's no approximation anywhere in there.
Upvote
0
WOW . . I just discovered that .00001=.99999!
Amazing. Time to hit the college prep math books for a refresher.
Next thing you know, Three Dog Night will be sued for telling us that 'One is the Loneliest Integer' when the Internet will prove with unfailing logic that 4 is actually the loneliest integer.
So 1 is exactly equal to .9999? And .9999 is exactly the same as 1? What about .9? What is that equal to?
If I borrow a dollar from you and you really need to be paid back in full, can I settle the debt with 99 cents? Same as a dollar, right? If I brrow three or five or a grand, can I settle the debt in full by paying you just little less than I borrowed? Apparently I can. Will you be my next loan officer?
So, .9999 = 3/3 and 1/3+1/3+1/3=.9999?
And so forth?
Your mistake is in the 4th line: 0.3333... + 0.333... + 0.33333 = .9999 not one which is equal to .999994 x the Internet = Bollocks. Some of us seem to leave up the missing piece of the math. I'll call it B for Bollocks.
Therefore, .9999 (B) = 1
I do know that E-MC Squared is not true. E=MC Hammer and You Can't Touch That, my friend.
Amazing. Time to hit the college prep math books for a refresher.
Next thing you know, Three Dog Night will be sued for telling us that 'One is the Loneliest Integer' when the Internet will prove with unfailing logic that 4 is actually the loneliest integer.
So 1 is exactly equal to .9999? And .9999 is exactly the same as 1? What about .9? What is that equal to?
If I borrow a dollar from you and you really need to be paid back in full, can I settle the debt with 99 cents? Same as a dollar, right? If I brrow three or five or a grand, can I settle the debt in full by paying you just little less than I borrowed? Apparently I can. Will you be my next loan officer?
So, .9999 = 3/3 and 1/3+1/3+1/3=.9999?
And so forth?
Your mistake is in the 4th line: 0.3333... + 0.333... + 0.33333 = .9999 not one which is equal to .999994 x the Internet = Bollocks. Some of us seem to leave up the missing piece of the math. I'll call it B for Bollocks.
Therefore, .9999 (B) = 1
I do know that E-MC Squared is not true. E=MC Hammer and You Can't Touch That, my friend.
Upvote
0
Don't forget that the ellipses ("...") at the end of ".999..." are very important / significant.
Upvote
0
Now that I know that less than one is equal to one, I am very concerned about the future of Ohms Law. Not Ohmslaw the delightful crunchy cabbage and apple salad, mind you. I almost cried when I discovered that Pluto is no longer a planet and nobody has figured out if it is possible to design a polypeptide sequence which will adopt a given structure under certain environmental conditions.
So as you might gather, I do not sleep much at night.
Apparently, these calculations will be on one or more of my upcoming tests:
P = E2/R, P = I2 * R, P = E * I, E = sqrt(P * R), E = P/I, E = I * R, I = E/R, I = P/E,
I = sqrt(P/R), R = E/I, R = E2/P and my personal favorite, R = P/I2
Please . . . will an expert confirm I can still use these simple formulas and get me my tickets if I substitute .9999 for 1? If it turns out that one amp is equal to less than one amp, my 10 mW Gunn diode and a mixer diode circuits could open a hole to the nexus of the cosmos if I am off by so much as .9999 somethings. And then where will I be? Lost in the nexus, so Bob needs help.
You do not screw around with microwaves, after all.
And if you are at sea and I my ship's radar settings are wrong, well, think back to Gilligan's island. You might be stuck with a few Gilligan's.
Or worse, remember Lost?
If i read on the net that Ohms Law is wrong, will my clock radio stop working? I think it will. Please save both the children and Ohms Law. If one is equal to less than one, it can have an effect on my studies for my Amateur Extra license test and eventually my GROL + Ship Radar Endorsement. Please contact my license examiner and let him or her know that the tests need to be changed.
My fear is we will learn that current through a conductor between two points is directly proportional to the potential difference across the two points is wrong, and I will not get up on time because my clock is no longer accurate. I might need a new clock radio with a digital dial. When I need to get up at 1 AM, I can set my clock to .9999. then it might work.
Less than one equals one. Pluto is no longer a planet, the world will end once again in 2012, Justin Bieber will keep recording, Lady Gaga will still be allowed to wear meat clothing and we will never know for certain if there is a finite upper bound on the multiplicities of the entries greater than 1 in Pascal's triangle.
I think I will end it all. Tomorrow after lunch, at .9999 O' Clock sharp. Give or take a minute or so. Rather, .9999 or .9997 or .9993.
So as you might gather, I do not sleep much at night.
Apparently, these calculations will be on one or more of my upcoming tests:
P = E2/R, P = I2 * R, P = E * I, E = sqrt(P * R), E = P/I, E = I * R, I = E/R, I = P/E,
I = sqrt(P/R), R = E/I, R = E2/P and my personal favorite, R = P/I2
Please . . . will an expert confirm I can still use these simple formulas and get me my tickets if I substitute .9999 for 1? If it turns out that one amp is equal to less than one amp, my 10 mW Gunn diode and a mixer diode circuits could open a hole to the nexus of the cosmos if I am off by so much as .9999 somethings. And then where will I be? Lost in the nexus, so Bob needs help.
You do not screw around with microwaves, after all.
And if you are at sea and I my ship's radar settings are wrong, well, think back to Gilligan's island. You might be stuck with a few Gilligan's.
Or worse, remember Lost?
If i read on the net that Ohms Law is wrong, will my clock radio stop working? I think it will. Please save both the children and Ohms Law. If one is equal to less than one, it can have an effect on my studies for my Amateur Extra license test and eventually my GROL + Ship Radar Endorsement. Please contact my license examiner and let him or her know that the tests need to be changed.
My fear is we will learn that current through a conductor between two points is directly proportional to the potential difference across the two points is wrong, and I will not get up on time because my clock is no longer accurate. I might need a new clock radio with a digital dial. When I need to get up at 1 AM, I can set my clock to .9999. then it might work.
Less than one equals one. Pluto is no longer a planet, the world will end once again in 2012, Justin Bieber will keep recording, Lady Gaga will still be allowed to wear meat clothing and we will never know for certain if there is a finite upper bound on the multiplicities of the entries greater than 1 in Pascal's triangle.
I think I will end it all. Tomorrow after lunch, at .9999 O' Clock sharp. Give or take a minute or so. Rather, .9999 or .9997 or .9993.
Upvote
0
remember that 0.99999... repeating is NOT the same number as 0.9 or 0.99 or 0.999 or 0.9999999999999999999999999
Upvote
0
Exactly.
In this case 0.9999... meant that it was repeating to infinity. I thought it was pretty obvious from the posts before. Since when does (1/3) in decimal form not repeat to infinity?
Upvote
0
The way I was taught mathematics and composition, an overline placed above the sequence is used to indicate a repeating sequence, and the ellipsis is used in composition (writing) to indicate that text has been skipped. An ellipsis can be used in mathematical notation for the same purpose as with composition, but isn't interchangeable with the overline. But because many websites and other Internet services don't offer the entire range of possible characters, substitutes for full mathematical notation are often used for convenience.
When it comes to decimal numbers like a string of nines to the right of the decimal, you can either round up to a solid 1 or accept that adding more nines will approach but never reach 1.
Upvote
0
That is more or less correct regarding the ellipsis in mathematics. It is generally used to signify that a number or trend continues. If it terminates, the last term is written; if not, it ends with the ellipsis. Such examples include infinite decimals (rational or irrational), sequences, series, recursive functions, and sets.
Upvote
0
don't let students know that(some profs say that 69.999 doesn't equal 70, lol)
some of you just dont seem to get it what is being wrote.
69.999 does NOT = to 70.
69.999... = 70; where the "..." means that the "9" is repeating to infinity.
.999... = 1
.999 not = 1
Upvote
0
Hang around here long loung enough, and you will learn that all calucuus is wrong, too.
But if you are baking brownies, how much does a pinch equal? Tell me that, my machinst friend?
Don't forget that the ellipses ("...") at the end of ".999..." are very important / significant.
Not in the world of Internet math, not one darn bit. So I will choose to ignore them altogether!
don't let students know that
Dont need no stinking proof. Fact is, 69.99 does NOT equal 70. Not if you divide by zero.zero, then you get a whole different number.
Upvote
0
:tongue: This thread is still alive?
The ... means the 000 continues infinitely, so you can't tack a 1 on at the end.
If you want to say 0.999999...+ 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000001= 1.000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 then I would agree with you.
If you want to say 0.999999...+ 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000001= 1.000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 then I would agree with you.
Upvote
0
Pie goes to infinity. Its not recurring. This .000 recurring with a 1 on the end. It has as much right to exist as any other infinite number so don't avoid the question
Upvote
0
That's different, pie is a known number. The question you phrased wasn't a known number nor was it an infinate number because you expressed it ended in 1
If you want to say
0.999...+0.(x)1
Where x is a set number of 0s, then yes that would be 1.(x)1.
If you want to say
0.999...+0.(x)1
Where x is a set number of 0s, then yes that would be 1.(x)1.
Upvote
0
BEST TECH IN 2023
We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.
Smartphones
Best Android Phones
See All- Google Pixel 8 Pro Check Price
- Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra Check Price
- Samsung Galaxy Z Fold5 Check Price
- Google Pixel 8 Check Price
- Samsung Galaxy S23 Check Price
Upcoming
See All
Best iPhones
See All- Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max Check Price
- Apple iPhone 15 Pro Check Price
- Apple iPhone 15 Plus Check Price
- Apple iPhone 15 Check Price
- Apple iPhone SE (2022) Check Price
Upcoming
See AllTablets
Best Tablets
See All- Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 Ultra Check Price
- Apple iPad Pro (2022) Check Price
- Apple iPad Air (2022) Check Price
- Apple iPad Mini (2021) Check Price
- Microsoft Surface Pro 9 Check Price
Upcoming
See AllLaptops
Best Laptops
See All- Apple Macbook Pro Check Price
- Apple Macbook Air (2023) Check Price
- Dell XPS 13 Check Price
- Acer Chromebook Spin 714 Check Price
- Dell Alienware m18 (2022) Check Price
Upcoming
See AllTelevisions
Best TVs
See All- Samsung The Frame TV Check Price
- Samsung Neo QLED 4K QN90C Check Price
- LG G3 OLED Check Price
- LG A2 OLED Check Price
- ROKU Plus Series Check Price
- Samsung S90C OLED Check Price
- SunBriteTV Veranda 3 Check Price
Upcoming
See AllGame Consoles
Best Game Consoles
See All- Nintendo Switch OLED Check Price
- Microsoft XBOX Series X Check Price
- Sony Playstation 5 Check Price
- Microsoft XBOX Series S Check Price
- Nintendo Switch Lite Check Price
Upcoming
See AllWearables
Best Wearables
See All- Oura Ring 3 Check Price
- Apple Watch Series 9 Check Price
- Google Pixel Watch 2 Check Price
- Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic Check Price
- Fitbit Inspire 3 Check Price
- Amazfit Amazfit Band 7 Check Price
- Apple Watch SE Check Price
- Apple Watch Ultra 2 Check Price
