You're not understanding something, Mister.
0.9999 ad infinitum never connects with 1, but always has remainder. The two they never connect. Unlike 1/2 or 1/5 as you brought up.
It is just a round up, but not an exactation.
.999 repeating equals 1
Sort:
One_Zeroith wrote:
You're not understanding something, Mister.
0.9999 ad infinitum never connects with 1, but always has remainder. The two they never connect. Unlike 1/2 or 1/5 as you brought up.
It is just a round up, but not an exactation.
You're not understanding something. The symbol for a repeating decimal has no remainder, by definition and consensus. Stop assigning a value you think it has, rather than the value it has. The non-connection aspect is all in your head.
A language analogy here would be you complaining that a snowflake isn't a snowflake because somebody called it another name. If a written language has no way of writing a certain sound, the sound still exists, and when written about, an approximation will be used. Just because you cannot separate the problem of expressing thirds in decimal format doesn't mean that the underlying value of 1/3rd changes.
Jul 14, 2023
0
#84
Infinity 9's with a dot in front of them DO NOT reach 1/infinity - Only Theoretically. It is the same as if you write Infinite 9's without the decimal point.
It simply does not fit into a power of 10. Something required for your theory to hold water. There is no last spot that either reach. It is so simple that Digit 9's never reach a 1-0 written number. But it is always (10^n)-1 ad infinitum, Sir.
One_Zeroith wrote:
Infinity 9's with a dot in front of them DO NOT reach 1/infinity - Only Theoretically. It is the same as if you write Infinite 9's without the decimal point.
It simply does not fit into a power of 10. Something required for your theory to hold water. There is no last spot that either reach. It is so simple that Digit 9's never reach a 1-0 written number. But it is always (10^n)-1 ad infinitum, Sir.
Lol, so because a calculator cannot resolve 1 divided by 3 as a decimal, the number/value 1/3rd simply doesn't exist in your universe...got it. Man, make the intuitive leap. It's right there.
Do you agree that the letters "Au", the word "gold", and the actual metal gold are not the same things? Let's start there.
Jul 14, 2023
0
#86
Calculators with infinite number placements options will never reach it, No.
Oh Yeah!
One - HUNDRED!
One_Zeroith wrote:
Calculators with infinite number placements options will never reach it, No.
And yet, the answer and the value of the number is 1/3rd whether the calculator makes an attempt or not, or if mankind even exists in the universe.
The fact that there is a problem in expressing it to your satisfaction is not material in this case.
You didn't answer the nomenclature question about gold...don't like where that path is leading?
Jul 14, 2023
0
#88
I'm leaving, MAN.
I Won!
This is the last post I will be making on this Thread.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/10-1-1-9-10-2-1-is-99-10-n-1-is-written-with-n-9s
One_Zeroith wrote:
I'm leaving, MAN.
I Won!
This is the last post I will be making on this Thread.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/10-1-1-9-10-2-1-is-99-10-n-1-is-written-with-n-9s
You didn't win, you picked up your toys and went home. But that's okay, I know it's frustrating.
Nope.
"1/3 = .333 repeating
2/3 = .666 repeating
3/3 = .999 repeating = 1"
Is just your opinion without any proof.
Did they teach you how to think in College, or just agree with the Professors?
Combine this with the base 10 point that I made, and you just might get it. This is not really a math issue for you, it's a language/symbology issue. You cannot reconcile that ".999..." is another way for writing 1 in base 10, and you can't get past your silly notion that a term that is only 6 characters is equivalent to the neverending series of 9s that is attempting to resolve in your head.
This comes from keeping yourself in too small a box. Get out from under your numbering system and look at the concept without the repeating decimal problem that occurs in base 10. It takes some imagination. I know, you have ten fingers, and like a caveman, this makes a lot of sense to you, but base 10 is a poor choice for math. Any base that is a power of 2 would be a lot better.
Is 1/3rd equal to ".333..."? Yes. Does this mean that 3/3rds = ".999..." = 1? Yes.
If we posited a numbering system based on Pi, Pi would no longer go on forever, Pi would be 1. Would that mean Pi changed value? No. The symbolic expression changes value, and some expressions have "issues". In base 10, *expressing* numbers divided into thirds is kind of an issue. In the "Pi = 1" numbering system, a *lot* of other issues in expressing common numbers we all use often would arise.