Thread has been deleted
Last comment
0.9999... = 1
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
true
2019-06-17 16:32
#1
 | 
Germany cucKingxaxa)) 
+0.99... /closed
2019-06-17 16:32
.9999¯ yes
2019-06-17 16:33
#8
 | 
Germany Kaidixdeh 
Why is your ¯ on no number? It should be in the first numbers after the comma
2019-06-17 16:36
I think he means .99999 repeating, you usually put the line above the number but can’t really do it easily on computer
2019-06-17 17:08
#52
 | 
Germany Kaidixdeh 
This was exactly what I meant to say.
2019-06-17 17:48
They always taught me to do 0.(9) if it’s infinite, if it has a pattern e.x: 0.789789789 you would do 0.(789) Edit: or 0.6(789)
2019-06-17 20:24
Same shit
2019-06-17 20:50
but 0.6(789) could also be seen as 0.6 x 789 or not?
2019-06-17 20:52
Yeah but we never run into that problem ever
2019-06-17 21:34
#205
 | 
Poland misterr_ 
+1 i never saw any line above it or smth, always these "0.(x)"
2019-06-17 21:47
Been to both German and Estonian schools and can confirm, that ''0.x(y)'' or however it appears is taught in most other countries, the only time I've seen it was in Germany, where the line above an infinite number of x-s behind the comma is a regular.
2019-06-17 22:01
>Been to two countries >Can confirm for most countries LUL
2019-06-18 18:39
In Slovakia we use the line
2019-06-18 18:50
#3
 | 
Netherlands PasscaLl 
1=2
2019-06-17 16:33
No
2019-06-17 18:10
#4
 | 
United Kingdom Koalathis 
Only idiots would say it's false...
2019-06-17 16:34
I say false can u explain why im idiot
2019-06-17 16:36
#7
 | 
United Kingdom Koalathis 
Because it's basic maths? You should have learnt this when you were like 12...
2019-06-17 16:36
but i didn't can u explain pls
2019-06-17 16:36
#11
 | 
United Kingdom Koalathis 
x = 0.999999 10x = 9.99999 10x - 1x = 9x 9x = 9 x = 1
2019-06-17 16:38
9x =/= 9
2019-06-17 16:40
#62
daps | 
Other not_bad 
+1
2019-06-17 18:00
Yeah it does Edit. when he's saying 0.999999 its representing 0.9 recurring. I assume you know that but this is the only way I can see you not understanding.
2019-06-17 18:57
If you call 9x = 9 then x=1 so 13,41 > 9x < 4.5
2019-06-17 20:22
( if you dont know x = 0,9999___
2019-06-17 20:23
but why ??? and how ???
2019-06-17 17:08
#53
 | 
Germany Kaidixdeh 
Why did 9.9999 suddenly got a x?
2019-06-17 17:50
#66
 | 
France ABxel 
It’s 10x = 9.999 = 9+x => 10x = 9+x => 10x - x = 9+x-x => 9x = 9 => x = 1 I think he did it too fast
2019-06-17 18:03
#90
 | 
Netherlands PasscaLl 
Yes
2019-06-17 18:23
#105
 | 
France Lioxys 
No because if x=1 10x=10 and not 9.99999 This is completely retarded, x=0.99999 or x=1 not both
2019-06-17 20:09
1/3 = 0,3333... 0,3333... * 3 = 0,999... 1/3 * 3 = 3/3 = 1 Therefore 0,999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:16
+1 I think this is the simplest method to understand the statement :)
2019-06-17 20:54
thx :)
2019-06-17 20:55
u got it
2019-06-17 21:59
#266
fox | 
Ireland FanGuy 
finally some sense
2019-06-18 19:34
#71
 | 
Kyrgyzstan CheeLongQua 
yikes
2019-06-17 18:09
x=0,11111 10x = 1,11111 10x-x =9x=1 but also: 9x = 0,99999
2019-06-17 20:25
this is false men))
2019-06-17 20:32
#234
JW | 
CIS sexpower 
nice education lul
2019-06-18 00:53
#238
 | 
United Kingdom Koalathis 
lol retards saying this is false... x = 0.999... 10x = 9.999... 9x would be 9.000... x would be 1
2019-06-18 11:40
#254
 | 
Estonia MorsAlbum 
how u go from 10x to 9x
2019-06-18 18:16
2019-06-18 18:15
0.9999999...9 = 1 but that's definitely not how you prove it x)
2019-06-18 18:48
For clarification: 0.(9) = 0.9999... with an infinite amount of 9's. x = 0.(9) | *10 10x = 9.(9) | -x (=0.(9)) 9x = 9.(9) - 0.(9) = 9 | /9 x = 1 Q.E.D.
2019-06-17 16:40
#128
2019-06-17 20:32
No it isn't. Give me a reason why it doesn't work.
2019-06-17 21:21
10x = 9.(9) | -x (=0.(9))
2019-06-17 21:30
Well, I'm not sure what's wrong with that, but I'll try to make the proof more comprehensive. First you define x as 0.(9), where there are an infinite amount of 9's behind the decimal point. Then you multiply both sides by 10. That gives you 10x on the left side. Now, on the right side the 9's behind the decimal point get "pushed" one digit to the left, because we're mulitplying by 10. But as there is an infinite number of 9's, the amount of 9's after the new decimal point will still be infinite. Thus the right side is 9.(9). Now you subtract x on both sides. On the left side you simple get 9x. On the right side, you have 9.(9) - x, but x just happenes to be 0.(9). The 9's after the decimal point cancel out due to the subtraction, leaving you with just a 9. Divide by 9, and you get x = 1.
2019-06-17 21:40
that's false Now, on the right side the 9's behind the decimal point get "pushed" one digit to the left, because we're mulitplying by 10
2019-06-17 21:40
No it's not. Please provide some evidence, unless you're just trying to waste my time.
2019-06-17 21:42
you didnt provide any evidence that 'the right side the 9's behind the decimal point get "pushed" one digit to the left, because we're mulitplying by 10'. THis is intuition ,but that's not a proof. So the whole proof is false
2019-06-17 21:44
That's a basic mathematical concept. Do you want me to prove that 1+1=2 next? >0.9999... | +0.(9) =1.999...8 | +0.(9) =2.999...7 | +0.(9) =3.999...6 | +0.(9) =4.999...5 | +0.(9) =5.999...4 | +0.(9) =6.999...3 | +0.(9) =7.999...2 | +0.(9) =8.999...1 | +0.(9) =9.999...0 | +0.(9) Again, prove that I'm wrong. You're pulling out arguments that don't exist.
2019-06-17 21:56
there is a big difference in saying that 0.abc*10=a.bc and that 0.x(1)x(2)x(3)...*10=x(1).x(2)x(3)x(4)...
2019-06-17 22:05
You are baiting me hard, aren't you? Let a = 5, b = 2, c = 3. Type into your calculator: 0.523*10. It will equal 5.23. This works for any abc. But again, you were just baiting me the whole time. I did have a feeling, but it's only now that I'm sure of it. ^^
2019-06-17 22:12
i can admit its working with abb, but with an infinite number mens)). Im not baiting. Maths are always trying to use infinite shit to fool you mens)). I dont think im saying something stupid here mens))
2019-06-18 01:37
0.33... =1/3 0.66... =2/3 0.99... =3/3 =1
2019-06-17 16:49
wtf can u explain ???
2019-06-17 16:50
thats the explanation, it doesnt make sense when you think about it, but mathematically it is correct
2019-06-17 16:51
but why wouldn't it be 0.33...=0.99.../3 0.66...=1.99.../3 0.99...=2.99.../3 ? Are mathematicians this dumb ?
2019-06-17 17:06
just type 1/3 in a calculator. Thats facts. 1/3 = 0.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333...
2019-06-17 17:11
but what about 0.99...=3/3 ??? my calculator just gimme a 1 when I type 3/3 !!! wtf can u explain ???
2019-06-17 17:15
ofc it does. Because 3/3 is 1. if you add 1/3+1/3+1/3 its 3/3 and thats 1. but if you add 0.33... (which is 1/3) + 0.33... +0.33... it equals 0.99... obv it doesnt sound right if you say 0.99... = 1 but thats mathematically proven. Its shit to explain like this on hltv but it is like that. Just google it if you dont believe me and need a further explanation
2019-06-17 17:19
but I can't do that on my calculator !!! and if I could I would add a 4 in the end of 0.33333 I'm not dumb !!! Otherwise it's not 1/3 !!! Wtf !!!
2019-06-17 17:23
there is NO end at 0.33...
2019-06-17 17:24
but someone told me that there is a difference between something that "tends" to 1/3 and something that is "equal" to 1/3 !!! he said that 1/3 just can't be written as a decimal number, and that this is even why we use fractions in the first place !!! He said that you could use as many 333333 as you want it'd never be 1/3 !!! WTF CAN U EXPLAIN ??!
2019-06-17 17:32
#43
 | 
Latvia Frip! 
Omg, just do this: 1/3= 0.333333333.. Then that 0.333333..x3 and it's 0.9999999.. Idk why no one said this
2019-06-17 17:36
thank you I was beginning to think that I was the only dumb person here !!!
2019-06-17 17:38
I have bad news for you, Francois...
2019-06-17 17:24
#85
 | 
United Kingdom aight_bet 
2/3=0.6666666667 actually.
2019-06-17 18:17
no. it is 0.66... the 6 never stops
2019-06-17 18:19
#88
 | 
United Kingdom aight_bet 
put it through a calculator. you'll always get 0.666666666667
2019-06-17 18:22
because your calculator cant show you an infinite amount of numbers. He has to end sometimes and is rounding
2019-06-17 18:24
calculator rounds the number
2019-06-17 20:05
low iq or b8
2019-06-17 20:17
Yes, correct. /Close
2019-06-17 16:34
#10
Woof | 
Greece PitbuII 
actually, it's wrong. You need + 0.111... to get the 1
2019-06-17 16:37
#12
 | 
Germany cucKingxaxa)) 
yesn't
2019-06-17 16:39
you just need to add .1 to the end to get the 1 and its not wrong.
2019-06-17 16:39
#16
 | 
United Kingdom Koalathis 
Bait or? There is nothing you can add to 0.999... to get it closer to 1.
2019-06-17 16:40
Lets hope it is bait, or at least that he figures out he is wrong.
2019-06-17 17:27
i can add 0.000000(infinite amount)1 then it'd be 1
2019-06-17 18:04
No, because the 0.99999 never ends, so if u add 0.0000001 the 1 has to have an end while the 0.999999 still continues. Nt tho
2019-06-17 20:22
but i said 0.00000(infinite ammount) and 1 so when the infinite ends it will add 1 and bum bigbang bitch
2019-06-17 20:32
U cant add 1 after an infinite amount. Thats not how infinite works.
2019-06-17 20:50
well, who decides, it's infinite anyway?
2019-06-17 20:54
Yes, its infite, it never ends, it has no end so u cant add 1 to its end
2019-06-17 20:57
i mean, no one understands the concept of "infinite", everything should have an end right? So, its infinite+1 cry me a river. Can you prove me that infinite as actually infinite or has no end?
2019-06-17 21:02
I wont be proving it to you, you will learn it in 6th grade in elementary school.
2019-06-17 21:46
HSIANSJSNXNXNXNSJCKSKCNSKC
2019-06-17 21:52
#228
 | 
Hungary Frake 
You can write it like this: infinity+1 is (N0=aleph null) N0+1 . The result is still N0 because: So sets A and B have cardinalities N0 and N0+1. And basic set theory tells us that we can define a bijection from any infinite set with cardinality N0 to any of its proper infinite subsets. Therefore, the two sets must have the same cardinality, so infinity+1 = infinity EDIT: Search for aleph null and bijection and you will understand in no time
2019-06-17 23:49
Thank you :)
2019-06-17 23:48
that means you can never add a 1
2019-06-17 20:24
#48
 | 
Netherlands ZoMilan 
These guys thinking they're smart with their maths and then not being sure if you're baiting -_-
2019-06-17 17:42
#49
 | 
Argentina BuscoNombre 
The difference between 0.9 and 1 is 1/10, the difference between 0.99 and 1 is 1/(10)^2. This meana the difference is 1/(10)^n being n the amount of nines you have. If you have infinites 9 then the difference is 1/(10)^infinite and thats is equal 0 That means the difference between 0.9999... and 1 is 0, so they are equal
2019-06-17 17:42
1/(10)^infinite how's that equal 0, im retarded pls explain, curious atm
2019-06-17 18:06
#107
 | 
Argentina BuscoNombre 
Well, when you divide a number for a really big one it will get closer to 0. So if you divide 1 by an infinite number it will be almost 0. You cant prove it with a normal count since infinite is not a number is a concept but if you consider 10^n like 10*10*10.. and the multiplication is a bunch of sum. With calculus things you can know the sum converges on 0
2019-06-17 20:15
I see, that makes sense. Thank you ♥️
2019-06-17 20:16
1/10 will never reach zero in an infinite amount of divisions. The numbers will go down and then they will go up again towards 1.
2019-06-18 00:00
This guy is retarded can confirm
2019-06-17 21:47
HAHAHAHSHSJSJXJSNXJSNDKSNFOSNFKSNFKSNJF
2019-06-17 21:51
no if you add 0.999... and 0.111...it will become 2 smh
2019-06-17 20:26
Yes mens)))) Proof : imgur.com/a/n44DRB5
2019-06-17 16:52
#246
 | 
Romania TheFatKid 
1/3 =/= 0.3333...
2019-06-18 16:15
No lol
2019-06-17 17:09
+1, which is more than +0.9999...
2019-06-17 17:28
#133
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:33
Nope. You're just rounding the 0.999...., that does make it the same as 1 since a fraction is missing. 3/3=1, not 3/3=0.9999....
2019-06-17 20:36
#156
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
bro if 1/3 * 3 = 1 1/3= 0.333... 0.333... * 3 = 1 = 0.999...
2019-06-17 20:37
Again no. 1/3*3=1 removes having to deal with the actual fractions That is why 3*0.3333333.... is not =1 since there you have those small fractions missing.
2019-06-17 20:41
#169
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
ok maybe
2019-06-17 20:45
#188
 | 
Finland xore1 
"0.3333333333..." is just an approximate value 1/3 is precise
2019-06-17 20:57
#189
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
ok maybe men)))
2019-06-17 20:58
0.999... = 1 You cant add anything to 0.999... to make it a 1 so it equals.
2019-06-17 21:48
No, just no. 1-0.999... is not zero which is what you're saying.
2019-06-17 22:55
So what is it then?
2019-06-17 23:15
It is 1-0.9999... No better way of defining it with this place not being great for math symbols and stuff.
2019-06-17 23:24
Let x = 0.9999… Then 10x = 9.9999… If we then subtract x from both sides of the equation, then: 10x – x = 9.9999… – 0.9999… So, 9x = 9 Divide both sides of the equation by 9, and… x = 1 … which, when we started, we said = 0.9999…
2019-06-17 23:25
You got that wrong, all you showed there is that the same as 0.9999.. - 0.9999.. =0 which is of course true. When you subtract the part to the right of decimal point what remains is of course the rest. The value 0.9999... is infinitely close to 1, but is not 1. You can round up to 1, but that is not the same.
2019-06-17 23:35
Nope, you are wrong.
2019-06-18 00:50
#268
 | 
Poland misterr_ 
brazzer how 0.(9) can be 1 if it is 0.(9) it will never hit 1, its always gonna be 0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
2019-06-18 19:42
How many times do I have to explain it in this thread lol? Just go look at some other comments and you will see why.
2019-06-18 19:44
#270
 | 
Poland misterr_ 
ok you are right wonder if i could answer on some math exam with 0.(9) since its equal 1 but written differently (if answer from a task would be 1)
2019-06-18 19:49
Try and see, if the teacher doesnt like it then destroy him/her with facts and logic
2019-06-18 19:49
Do you still not get it or?
2019-06-17 23:26
This thread has gotten really silly. The value 0.9999... is infinitely close to 1, but is not 1. You can round up to 1, but that is not the same as it being equal to 1.
2019-06-17 23:37
Nope, you are wrong.
2019-06-18 00:50
Repeating something wrong doesn't make it right. Lets try this: 1-0.9999.. >0 1>0.9999.... Not sure I can make it anymore clear.
2019-06-18 16:12
Let x = 0.9999… Then 10x = 9.9999… If we then subtract x from both sides of the equation, then: 10x – x = 9.9999… – 0.9999… So, 9x = 9 Divide both sides of the equation by 9, and… x = 1 … which, when we started, we said = 0.9999… Not sure I can make it anymore clear. There is nothing you can add to 0.9999... to make it a 1. Therefore 1-0.999... = 0
2019-06-18 18:09
"There is nothing you can add to 0.9999... to make it a 1. Therefore 1-0.999... = 0" That is two separate statements, you can't use the first statements as evidence of the second.
2019-06-18 18:37
It goes hand in hand. You are pathetic, really. You have no real arguments, I provided you many but it seems like your math skills just aren't there yet. See you in 5 years when you pass the 8th grade and will finally understand why 0.999... = 1
2019-06-18 18:48
LOL Here comes the insults. I have given you the arguments you're just not understanding logic. Equal to means that what is on the two sides is of identical value, not that the two sides are almost identical and that includes when the difference is infinitely small. Ergo 0.999... = 1 is not a true statement.
2019-06-18 19:08
Didnt read, oof #259
2019-06-18 19:36
x = 0.9999.... 10x = 9.999.... 10x-x = 9 9x = 9 x = 1 Therefore 0.9999.... = 1
2019-06-18 18:55
Actually it isn't equal. The value 0.999... approaches 1 but actually it isn't. The decimal expansion of 1 is obviously 1 or you may write 1.000... Both expressions aren't same but tend to be equal when sufficiently large amount of 9s are taken.
2019-06-17 17:10
+1 limits and equalities aren't the same
2019-06-17 17:18
Actually it is the same. There is no number between 0.9... and 1 and therefore it is the same. That was one correct argument, but there are quite a few more, see here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...
2019-06-17 17:33
That just means 0.999... is the nearest number to 1 which is also less than 1. As shankman mentioned above, limits and equalities aren't same.
2019-06-17 17:34
No, it doesn't. This also has nothing to do with limits.
2019-06-17 17:35
Yes it has to do with limits actually 1= lim k->infty sigma n=0, n=k (9/10)*(1/10)^n
2019-06-17 17:38
Yes, and that is a of proving that 0.(9) is in fact 1. See this: i.imgur.com/k9dgbB4.png Also note the definitions
2019-06-17 17:40
Actually you don't understand how limits aren't actual values. No school kid will understand that. Actually the limit n->infty is equal to 1 not the real expression. You don't put limit there if it is equal. Do you understand? Involvement of limit means you're taking approx value.
2019-06-17 17:46
I do know my way around limits and the limit is actually a real value unless it tends towards infinity. In this case it is a possible way to define a number. Read the article I linked and some of the references. A good summary is this: homepages.warwick.ac.uk/staff/David.Tall.. Don't tell me that all of the fairly big names in the references are actually wrong because of "dude trust me".
2019-06-17 17:58
Wtf are you on? You know that limits aren't real value if it tends to infty and still you don't understand. ok can't argue more with you.
2019-06-17 18:00
I'm not arguing about limits. Other than that: The limit is an actual value something approaches. A limit IS a value unless the limit is infinity. First year student?
2019-06-17 18:01
I'm not even talking about limit approaching some number. I'm talking about the points which don't exist on graph and infty is one of them. How can you talk about that part of graph which doesn't even exist? Actually limit is approximation for all those points where the graph doesn't exist. It has nothing to do with infty. Obviously graph doesn't exist at infty. Also I don't believe the text because it is like dude forget everything and follow what I say. Everything goes in my brain, all what he says and all those students say. I've been through all these answers to a question and I follow my version of it because there is no answer to this question which is undisputed unless it is mix of everything. Btw not a first year student.
2019-06-17 18:17
"I'm talking about the points which don't exist on graph and infty is one of them." That is literally what I am saying "Also I don't believe the text because it is like dude forget everything and follow what I say." It really isn't. The point of it is to explain it to you, not to tell you this without you thinking whatsoever. I see why you wouldn't want to trust my explanations or even wikipedias, but here are several widely accepted proofs in the references and especially in the books, written by well acclaimed mathematicians. These are trustworthy and not really disputed.
2019-06-17 18:22
Actually I don't follow these proofs or explanations because there the disputed concept of 0^0. Calculators show it is 1 but it really isn't. Imo student should've their own understanding of a disputed concept. Btw for me infty is a huge number but not the largest number. I don't go by that concept of calling infty the largest number.
2019-06-17 18:53
0^0 being 1 is not really disputed. Also, there are different infinities and infinity is not really a number per se
2019-06-17 19:42
Ok bro 0^0 is one of the limited forms. Don't you know? Obviously I meant how you perceive infty. Not the actual def of infty.
2019-06-17 19:46
Yes, but the most common one that is used is 1 Also, I don't know why a perception of infinity is needed when you have the definition
2019-06-17 20:31
What?? 0^0 is one of the indeterminate forms in limits. Wtf you talking about? Actually if you have brain, you'd need perception of anything. It isn't just about closing eyes and solving problems.
2019-06-17 20:33
I know it is, but the most common value that is assumed for 0^0 is 1. Also, I don't actually need a perception of infinity to solve any problem and I really don't know what else matters in this context
2019-06-17 20:37
Ok maybe you don't because you don't have to use brain in your questions. Also the most common value of an indeterminate form doesn't make sense.
2019-06-17 20:38
Please explain to me why you magically know that I don't have to use my brain in my question when you know absolutely nothing about me, and just because I don't have a real "perception" of infinity. Please explain to me how it doesn't make sense to have a value that is used for something that is indeterminate. Having 1 as the assumed value is just for convenience reasons and doesn't really have a negative impact on anything, so why not assume 1 in most cases?
2019-06-17 21:36
Ok wait how do you approach lim k->infty 1/k. You obviously won't use brain and have some perception and would write =0 blatantly. Now if the question changes to lim k->infty k-(k+1) what would you do here. Now would you say infty is the biggest number so there can't be anything bigger than infty(yeah thats the definition) so either the answer is negative or 0. Now if you take it as a large number, you won't have such intricacies in your mind. A lot of things behave better in perceptions. This way of thinking helps in physics too.
2019-06-17 21:43
The answer is -1 and not 0. In physiks you use a lot of approximations and do stuff mathematicians would never do, but that doesnt mean its mathematically correct.
2019-06-17 21:59
I would approach lim k->infty k-(k+1) like this: lim k->infty k-(k+1) = lim k->infty (k-k-1) = lim k->infty (-1) = -1 None of what you say is really an issue in this problem when you just simplify first. I find thinking of infinity as a large number a real burden more than anything else. I really can't think of anything where it would be good to think of infinity as a large number instead of a concept. I also do not see it as "the biggest number", I don't see it as a number at all
2019-06-17 21:59
may i ask what you study?
2019-06-17 20:36
Why btw? I will PM you if you tell me the reason.
2019-06-17 20:43
The funny thing is that this is way closer to an actual proof that everything I’ve read on this page up to this point
2019-06-18 11:49
mathematicians agree on this though, prove em wrong
2019-06-17 20:24
Agree on what? They themselves don't agree on many things. nt Just let me tell the reason spherical geometry was created. Saying 0.999...=1 is like saying inversion gives exact answer as the synthetic methods in geometry.
2019-06-17 20:30
but they agree on this, saying they disagree on many things doesnt change that indian iq
2019-06-17 20:30
ok lol just give me some official statement Danish. Should just stfu when you don't know anything about limits,etc. Read above thread for if you have some brain.
2019-06-17 20:32
lol thinks hes smarter than mathematicians just because he took highschool math class
2019-06-17 20:33
ok lol you just show me an official link where all mathematicians agree on this. Haha I'm asking for the link. Y'all aren't taught English in schools or what? Haha if I were thinking I was smarter, I would've created my own maths and haven't followed theirs.
2019-06-17 20:35
lol wikipedia even has a section on confused highschool kids like you en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...#Skepticis..
2019-06-17 20:37
#46
2019-06-17 20:40
"Students of mathematics often reject the equality of 0.999... and 1, for reasons ranging from their disparate appearance to deep misgivings over the limit concept and disagreements over the nature of infinitesimals." "Intuition and ambiguous teaching lead students to think of the limit of a sequence as a kind of infinite process rather than a fixed value, since a sequence need not reach its limit. Where students accept the difference between a sequence of numbers and its limit, they might read "0.999..." as meaning the sequence rather than its limit."
2019-06-17 20:43
Read the fucking thread #44
2019-06-17 20:45
44 doesn't say anything...
2019-06-17 20:46
You have been proven wrong several times in this thread yet you still try to argue? Pathetic.
2019-06-17 23:21
#134
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:33
There is actual fault that 0.333... =/= 1/3 simply because it is infinitely long which means it is approx.
2019-06-17 20:36
0.9=0.9 1=1 Thx me later
2019-06-17 17:10
W0W
2019-06-17 17:21
No, now go get your degree
2019-06-17 19:52
#28
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
Nah, but basically
2019-06-17 17:15
It is the same number in mathematics, but a different representation. It is factually the same number
2019-06-17 17:37
#70
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
I wouldn't say "factually" but "practically"
2019-06-17 18:08
It is factually, not just practically. There are numerous mathematical proofs for that
2019-06-17 18:12
#80
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
Link plz
2019-06-17 18:12
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999... This summarizes several proofs quite well, if you want more or more in-depth explainations there are several books/papers in the reference for that
2019-06-17 18:13
#83
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
Thanks, I'm going to take a look at it.
2019-06-17 18:16
#136
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:33
#165
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
1/3 can't be accurately expressed in decimal format
2019-06-17 20:42
He's right, here's the proof: 1/3= 0.333333 so 0.333333*3= 1, not 0.999999 You can make a quick google search, there are a ton of good explanations why it's like that
2019-06-17 17:16
#69
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
1/3 =/= 0.33333333 1/3 can't be expressed in decimal format.
2019-06-17 18:08
Let x = 0.9999… Then 10x = 9.9999… If we then subtract x from both sides of the equation, then: 10x – x = 9.9999… – 0.9999… So, 9x = 9 Divide both sides of the equation by 9, and… x = 1 … which, when we started, we said = 0.9999… Let this sink in for a minute
2019-06-17 18:11
#82
 | 
Mexico LEWORb 
Ok, now this algebraic explanation makes sense. The 1/3 one doesn't.
2019-06-17 18:16
9.99999999...-0.99999...=8.99999.... Which mean x is less than 1 still.
2019-06-17 18:21
You wrote x=0.999999 Then you wrote x=1 at the end. So your assumption is wrong.
2019-06-18 19:32
0.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 ! = 1
2019-06-17 17:48
#54
friberg | 
Faroe Islands fthata 
nope only 1 = 1
2019-06-17 17:53
1 === 1
2019-06-17 18:09
#55
 | 
Denmark 23_Savage__ 
x=0.9999..... 10x=9.9999..... 10x-x=9.9999...-0.9999... 9x=9.000... 9x/9=9.000.../9 x=1.0000 x=0.9999 0.9999...=1 1=0.9999....
2019-06-17 17:54
#56
 | 
Other VladimirLucas 
999 is not equal to 1000 so why 0.9999999999 equal to 1 it's not
2019-06-17 17:54
You can't just cut off the stream of 9s at some point. Its infinite and 0.9 with an infinite number of 9s following is the same as 1
2019-06-17 17:59
#137
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:34
who cares?
2019-06-17 17:57
0iq
2019-06-17 17:59
#64
 | 
Lithuania Sealll 
1/3 = 0.333... 2/3 = 0.666... 3/3 = 0.999... ,but also 3/3 =1, therefore 0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 18:01
yes it is, we learn this in 8th grade.
2019-06-17 18:02
#163
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
nice men))))
2019-06-17 20:40
close enough
2019-06-17 18:09
#138
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:34
Thats not a valid proof tho
2019-06-17 20:43
#74
 | 
World DygL 
yes 0.(9) is 1
2019-06-17 18:09
3+2 = 8
2019-06-17 18:09
#77
 | 
Germany 2k19 
0.9 = 6.0
2019-06-17 18:11
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999... choose whichever proof you prefer
2019-06-17 18:24
But what if I have the following calculation? 1 - Infinitesimal The result should be 0.999999999999999999999999999 but if 0.999999=1 then the result should be 0.9999999999999999999999999999.....99998 and that doesnt make sense to me.
2019-06-17 19:44
thats because infinitesimal doesnt really exist as a real number
2019-06-17 20:27
Neither does 0.999999999999999, or?
2019-06-17 20:35
its different because 0,999... is rational
2019-06-17 20:36
You are saying that it can be expressed in a fraction with integers?
2019-06-17 20:37
yes, 3/3 = 0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:38
hm :/
2019-06-17 20:44
yes its confusing. infinitesimals aren't really real in a real number system
2019-06-17 20:45
#139
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:34
Yes I know all the classical proofs bro, thats why I asked my own question.
2019-06-17 20:35
#98
United States koth 
So on a graph .999... will touch the 1 line? That is what .999...=1 means.
2019-06-17 19:50
Draw me an infinite line on a graph and we will see.
2019-06-18 18:11
No need to. It will be infinitely closer to the line but never touch it.
2019-06-18 19:28
Oh look, how cute...a "point 9 repeating" troll. Let's see...where to start...your linguistic definition of infinity is not exactly relevant. As soon as you agree that a number like pi can have infinitely many digits (which I doubt you dispute), then we could change each of the digits after the decimal point to a 9 and get our "point 9 repeating" number. That concept exists completely independently of how you write it (with the dots or whatever) or of the English word "infinity" (which, incidentally, mathematicians use sparingly--mostly as the adjective "infinite" to describe sets). Lofty philosophical concepts of what infinity might mean have little to do with precise mathematical definitions. If I had stopped writing the numbers, they would have rounded?? Numbers don't round by themselves. People round them because they decide they can ignore some of the digits for whatever purposes they currently require. It looks like you're claiming that "point 9 repeating" not only doesn't equal 1, but that it's also not a rational number. That must mean that one-third of it ("point 3 repeating") is also irrational. But you didn't seem to think that the number 1/3 is irrational. Holes in my math, huh? How about you bring my post and your response to 10 random mathematicians, and see whose they pick as having holes. Since your basic problem seems to be that infinity is too mystical to be quantified in algebra, I'll even grant you 10 highly spiritually inclined mathematicians. You have also not answered the very basic challenge: If you claim that "point 9 repeating" doesn't equal 1, then the burden falls on you to find me the number halfway between the two. When you manage that, I'll listen more closely. I'm not the one hiding behind algebra; you're the one hiding behind vague, non-mathematical definitions.
2019-06-17 19:51
i arent read that
2019-06-17 20:28
0.(9) is in fact equal to 1. This can be proven using either the formula for a decreasing geometrical series sum as in 0.9 + 0.09 + 0.009 +.... or using x. x=0.(9) 10x=9.(9) 10x-x=9.(9)-0.(9)=9=9x x=1
2019-06-17 20:46
#100
khaos | 
Netherlands mikat 
9+10=21
2019-06-17 19:52
#147
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:36
North=good team
2019-06-17 19:54
-0.999..
2019-06-17 20:32
true if you see price in store 0,99$ you actually pay 1$ cause 1 cent means nothing
2019-06-17 19:54
you piece of shit... World Population Clock: 7.7 Billion People. 99.9999% of 7700000000 = 7699992300. So, 7700000000 - 7699992300 = 7700. Only 7700 smart ppl in the world.
2019-06-17 20:14
#140
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
w1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:35
0.9999->1 that's it men
2019-06-17 20:17
0.9999... < 1
2019-06-17 20:27
#141
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:35
approx. but no matter how many 9s you add after "0. " it will never be juan.
2019-06-17 20:47
#126
Szohn | 
Nepal Nepali 
No, it's just 0.9999999999....
2019-06-17 20:31
#142
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
1/3=0.333... 2/3=0.666... 3/3=0.999... = 1
2019-06-17 20:35
2/3=0.666777 3/3=1
2019-06-17 20:37
#159
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
wtf pls do 1/3 in a scientific calculator
2019-06-17 20:38
Flag checks out
2019-06-17 20:58
You round it up. Thats not how it works. 2/3 = 0.666...
2019-06-18 18:13
No it's not. Take a simple equation: x=0.(9) 10x=9.(9) 9x=10x-x=9.(9)-0.(9)=9 x=1
2019-06-17 20:59
Engineer detected
2019-06-17 20:37
#161
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
+1
2019-06-17 20:38
Engineer? U mean 8th grader.
2019-06-17 20:47
#181
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
bro im in 5th grade 😎😎😎
2019-06-17 20:55
I can see cuz ur proof sux
2019-06-17 20:55
#185
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
thank u men))))) 😎😎😎😎
2019-06-17 20:56
It's not wrong, but nobody uses notations like that except for engineers
2019-06-17 22:12
i'm not saying it's wrong, it's just shit.
2019-06-17 22:14
x = 70 niBBa
2019-06-17 20:55
#186
 | 
Spain Classicalesp 
true
2019-06-17 20:56
X = gon give it to ya
2019-06-17 23:27
never.
2019-06-17 21:04
yes
2019-06-17 23:16
#230
 | 
United States 6ALPHAMALE2 
0.999... = 0.(9) = 1 1/3 * 3 = 3/3 = 1 1/3 = 0.(3) 3/3 = 0.(9) = 1 can't explain better /close
2019-06-17 23:51
Haha I love this meme men)) ofc is true but also false = true
2019-06-18 01:40
these threads never die
2019-06-18 01:46
agree lol
2019-06-18 11:45
no
2019-06-18 11:41
0.99999 = 0.1111111111111111011
2019-06-18 11:50
#243
 | 
Australia JAY_DAWG 
how does a number equal a number that the first number is not?
2019-06-18 11:52
It is not equal: decimal a = 0.9999m; decimal result; result = a * 52; Console.WriteLine(result); // 51.9948 int b = 1; int intResult; intResult = b * 52; Console.WriteLine($"{intResult:F4}"); // 52.0000
2019-06-18 11:59
#250
arT | 
Brazil PQD28 
ok
2019-06-18 18:11
0.(9) != 1
2019-06-18 18:45
+1 it's the same as 1+1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16+1/32+...=2. You can use the same way to prove both of these.
2019-06-18 19:05
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.