.999999 = 1
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by reno96teg
let it go, man. i have a math minor and an engineering degree, and i believe that this guy is full of crap.
Pic Whore
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22,224
Likes: 1
From: NJ
Originally Posted by Kestrel
I'm going to say this one more time...0.9repeating, which is the number in question, is an infinite construct: that is, 0.9 followed by an infinite number of 9's. We are talking about infinite sum of numbers, and the limit or infinite sum is the correct way to deal with it. It seems counterintuitive, but the math supports the conclusion.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Jani
using limits IS the correct way to do it, but in regards to the original question, a number with a repeating decimal CANNOT be equal to a real/whole number
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 30,331
Likes: 0
From: Montréal, Canada
Originally Posted by Jani
using limits IS the correct way to do it, but in regards to the original question, a number with a repeating decimal CANNOT be equal to a real/whole number
h:
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Tark
i think you guys will never solve this. Because mathematical science says it is the same while logic says it isint. Just because something is mathemicly doesnt mean it is logicly and vice versa...
Push to shock!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,583
Likes: 0
From: Palo Alto, CA
Originally Posted by reno96teg
let it go, man. i have a math minor and an engineering degree, and i believe that this guy is full of crap.
The problem with the statement is that it goes against every notion we have of less than, greater than, or equal to. How can something that looks less than one be equal to one? But the concept of infinity is counterintuitive in its nature. Inf - Inf doesn't equal 0, and what the hell is 2*Inf or Inf+5? What's 0.9 repeating, but 1 - x where x gets very very small. But if its infintesimally small, do we acknowledge its existence, or do we just say it's nothing? Modern calculus, physics, and engineering disregards x's existence at this point, and x becomes zero, so 0.9repeat = 1. This is the realm I was trained in, so I too, agree that x becomes 0 and so 0.9repeat = 1. Number theory also supports this conclusion as well.
The point is, that the guy isn't full of shit. It's a legitimate statement supported in many realms of mathematics, but goes against your basic notions of how numbers work.
Pic Whore
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22,224
Likes: 1
From: NJ
Modern calculus, physics, and engineering disregards x's existence at this point, and x becomes zero, so 0.9repeat = 1. This is the realm I was trained in, so I too, agree that x becomes 0 and so 0.9repeat = 1. Number theory also supports this conclusion as well.