It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


.9 repeating = 1? Is our numerical system flawed?

page: 18
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by Former CIA Agent

LoL. Good post.

Yeah, it's fun to watch him talk down to us though, because he calls us "humans" as if he's some higher, more intelligent being that knows more than us. Yet, you can tell by his basic mathematics understanding that he is not a higher being.

He is having a hard time understanding that infinites are only able to be displayed through symbols, and that what he is really looking at is a finite number with a symbol attached to it to show that is continuing to grow (or shrink).

He would have a real tough time with Calc.

*Edited to add:

Oh, but the measurable vs. immeasurable method of explaining was brilliant.

[edit on 7-4-2008 by Sublime620]

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 01:26 AM
I don't know how to dumb it down for you people who are too slow to realize it.... I did the best I could to get you guys to understand basic math...

..but no matter what, you people have been brainwashed to believe a number means something it really doesn't.

You keep saying 1/3 = .3...

It DOES, and it DOESN'T equal .3...

You see...
When you do the long division, 1 divided by 3, you do get an answer forming, but no matter what you can not finish the equation. KEYWORD EQUAtion. You are trying to make it EQUAL. An infinitely repeating number IS NOT EQUAL to ANYTHING.

...the image above perfect proves that you all are wrong. You see, even though no matter what I do the answer will say .3... THE EQUATION HAS NOT BEEN FINISHED, THERE IS STILL A REMAINDER LEFT OVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can not simply forget about the remainder, you have to do something with it. When you say 1/3 = .3... you are completely forgetting the REMAINDER!

I don't know how to get that into your little brains, but some reason you just ignore it? TO MUCH FAITH IN YOUR MATH???? LOL

It's a fact that 1/3 does NOT EQUAL .3... because their is a remainder left over!!! So that means there is always 1 bit that is not represented in the .3...!!! It can NEVER BE EQUAL EVER.

1/3 != .3...
1/3 = 1/3

All you have to do to get your answer is finish this chart...

1 - .9 = .1
1 - .99 = .01
1 - .999 = .001
1 - .9999 = .0001
1 - .99999... = ???

Can't you see? It doesn't matter how many nines there are, there is ALWAYS 1 LEFT!!!! This infinite pattern DOES NOT CHANGE!!! No matter how "infinite" you go, the answer DOES NOT CHANGE!

If you want to find what number is between 1 and .9... you can subtract .9... from 1 using A MATHMETICAL METHOD DESIGNED BY THE VERY PEOPLE WHO INVENTED MATH.

The method is "all from 9 last from 10", it works every time, and is the same exact method you would use normally, but it is backwards. You subtract backwards, instead of forwards, and this gives you your answer 100 times faster, and gives you that ability to calculate to infinity if you needed too.

In normal subtraction, you carry the 1 over across the 0's so you can subtract the 9's. When you "carry the 1" it is being used to finish the equation. The mathematical method "all from 9 last from 10" is just a quick way to carry over the 1.

For example 10000 - 2359 =
You subtract 2 from 9, 3 from 9, 5 from 9, and the LAST 9 from 10. To get your answer 7641.

Use the same method for 1.000... - .9... =
Subtract 9 from 9, 9 from 9, 9 from 9, infinitely... AND YOU STILL ARE CARRYING THE 1, you still have "last from 10" but you havn't reached the last number yet, so you still have the remainder!. This means .9... is not 1 because the remainder is not accounted for!!

Here you are doing an equation looking for the answer, and the answer is in your hand as you are doing the equation. The equation never end's so you still have the remainder that you are using to finish the calculation.

If you don't understand that, then there is no hope for you people.

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 02:09 AM

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
I don't know how to dumb it down for you people who are too slow to realize it.... I did the best I could to get you guys to understand basic math...

You should try smartening it up a bit and learn something beyond basic math; Then we might collide someday. Chow. Until then have fun in basic math and dumb dumb down down land.

I think I speak for all of us here who have posted when I say in reply to "If you don't understand that, then there is no hope for you people."

We no longer deal with hope, we understood those concepts years ago, we radiate a crisp knowledge of mathematics.

All you have to do to get your answer is finish this chart...

1 - .9 = .1
1 - .99 = .01
1 - .999 = .001
1 - .9999 = .0001
1 - .99999... = ???

The chart never ends, buddy. There is no chart. You're once again taking finite concepts and applying them to infinity. You say things like... "as far as infinity goes!"... infinity goes no where, because it has no where to go, it is simply eternally everywhere forever and immeasurably so. The immeasurable presence of absence or the infinite 1, or 0=1.

Well guys, it was nice while it lasted. Thanks. You'll come around to it someday ALLisONE (Don't forget that ONEisINFINITE)

[edit on 8-4-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 10:20 AM
reply to post by ALLis0NE

Have you shown us .9999999... repeating on a number line without symbols yet?

You do realize that .3333333... is just a THEORETICAL representation of the number 1/3?

You do realize that .9999999... is not a number, per se, as it is not constant and is continuously moving towards and end goal?

You claim to be above us, but you have only attempted (and not well) to show us "flaws" in ours.

Do you have a better number system for us to use? Can you show us a more efficient method, or are you just trolling around making no sense?

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 12:05 PM
aside from you people arguing and slinging mud back and forth, i thought this was a fun thread.

i do appreciate CIA's post about the holographic shoes. it made me see it from another point of view - sampling .9... in anyway creates an instance of that infinitely long number that is finite. however, i still have a problem with the idea that i can't say there's an infinitely small error between .9... and 1.


so infinitely small that it can't exist at all? o_O am i on to something or am i still not getting it? =)

[edit on 8-4-2008 by an0maly33]

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 12:39 PM
reply to post by an0maly33

You can say that there is an small error.

It's well known in limits that while the number never really reaches it, it just comes so close that it is basically equal.

posted on Apr, 8 2008 @ 01:12 PM
Hmmm... let me try an allegorical approach:

Hey, ALLisONE, did you know that if you start at one end of a bridge, walk halfway to the center, and then half of that distance, etc... again and again and again, you'll never ever get to the other side because you will be dividing the distance in half infinitely?


You are stuck in infinity because you don't even know what it is. Just because something has infinite pieces, doesn't mean IT IS INFINITE. The rest of us have traversed the "one bridge of infinate pieces", and are staring at you wondering why the hell you are saying that you can never possibly make the journey across the bridge.

We're (for the most part) trying to pull you across, but you are denying that it is possible.

It is possible because 0.999... = 1: There is NOTHING between the two.

Cross the "one bridge" already.

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:15 AM
I think all that needs to be said in the way of physical geometrics is infinitely homothetic and of which inversed functionalities would be impossible.

The ideology defined in a constance of immeasurable continuity is parallel to that of an infinitely measurable concept.

Maybe that's what you wanted to see ALLisONE? Maybe that's what you were trying to say? Infinity has no beginning and no end, no locality... but you're always trying to move toward it, toward a supposed perfection.

[edit on 9-4-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 01:25 PM
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal

Oh oh, can we argue derivatives next?

Dy over dx for the win?

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 05:49 PM

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
I think all that needs to be said in the way of physical geometrics is infinitely homothetic and of which inversed functionalities would be impossible.

can you please explain how this applies here?

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 09:56 PM

Originally posted by puerk
can you please explain how this applies here?

Sure. A universe that is infinitely homothetic would in theory propose that all shapes can be infinitely larger and smaller than themselves at perfect intervals and dimensions of growth and shrinkage in contrast to one another and theirselves. Infinite fractions. And because of this infinite foundation it is a default that all shapes are of the infinite space.

ALLisONE was describing this sort of thing a few pages back with the paint program and the infinitely smaller triangles. I'm edging toward understanding what he/she might have been trying to convey instead of giving up altogether.

posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 03:26 PM
I really think you people should learn what "equal" means.

For two things to be equal, they both have to have exactly the same value.

.9... with never ending infinite 9's is NOT getting closer to 1. It's not going anywhere, nor will it "eventualy be equal to 1". Its NOT MOVING.

Of course, if you are talking about a process of caluclation, like long division. Or a computer program that is being told to make a long calculation of 1 divided by 3. Then the ANSWER IS growing, not the number, the ANSWER, because there is nothing in this universe that can instantly finish the equasion, it has to do it just like long division. It keeps dropping the 0 and subtracting 9 from 10 leaving the 1 left over, then it starts again. An infinite loop making the answer grow, not the number.

The problem is, I have 12 years of computer programing experiance, and I have worked with these infinite numbers before. Most of you people have never had to write a computer program in your life, so you don't know what I'm talking about..

Ever herd of NaN?

Stands for NOT A NUMBER.

Well sorry to say but,


ARE NOT NUMBERS, THEY ARE INCOMPLETE. .9... is not equal to 1. Because .9... does not exist.

[edit on 19-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 01:01 AM
I don't know if it has been posted or mentioned, but I just want to demonstrate that, indeed, 0.9999^ is exactly equal to 1, according to the Geometric Series expansion.

First let's represent 0.999^ as a geometric series (please let me know if any symbol is not seen or understood):

∑ (9/10^n) = 9/10 + 9/ 100 + 9/1000 + ... = 0.9 + 0.09 + 0.009 +...

Which is equal to 0.99999^, so I got the series representation of this number. Now I will make some arithmetic arrangements to convert this generic series into a geometric series:

∑ (9/10^n) =

∑ (9)(1/10)^n =

∑ (9/10)(10)(1/10)^n =

∑ (9/10)*(1/10)^(-1)*(1/10)^n =

∑ (9/10)(1/10)^(n-1)

Now it has the form of a geometric series with a = 9/10 and r = 1/10.
You can check Calculus books, or maybe you already now that this series converges to an equation that results in 1, but for those who may be skeptical, I will follow the entire process. So, from the above series we may form a sequence that is:

Sn = 9/10 + (9/10)(1/10) + (9/10)(1/100) + ... = 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 +...

Then we multiply by r:
(1/10)Sn = 9/100 + 9/1000 + 9/10000 + ...

And we substract:
Sn - (1/10)Sn = 9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ... - 9/100 - 9/1000 - 9/ 10000 - ...

As you can see, all terms are cancelled except the very first from the first sequence Sn and the very last from the last sequence (1/10)Sn. Then:

(9/10)Sn = 9/10 - 9/10^n; where n -> ∞ because it is in the last term.

Sn = (9/10 - 9/10^n)/(9/10); n -> ∞

Now we calculate the limit:

Lim Sn = (9/10)/(9/10) = 1

This happens because 10^n when n->∞ is ∞ and 9/∞ is 0.

So, it is demonstrated that the series, that represents 0.99999^ converges to 1. Everything I did can be found on Calculus books, so I did not invent it, it is backed up by centuries of calculus development. I know there may be philosophical and logical implications about infinity in the operations I did, but to answer yourself those questions I believe you would have to read from the books of the very developers of these methods, which I believe were Euler, Cauchy and in a lesser degree, Newton. They must have the logical demonstrations of the operations I did.

Series are a very valid and powerful mathematical tool, so I hope this may be enough to satisfy the OP's curiosity.

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 01:40 AM
reply to post by Halicarnassus

Yay! I knew someone would post up some ownage limits eventually.

I haven't done limits in a few years. I would have posted them up earlier, but I honestly don't remember them that well.

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 02:20 AM
Yes, the applied limit is the core of the demonstration. I just read AllisOne's posts and I must say that I totally agree with him about the remainder issue. But think about that 1 remainder, in what position is it? Not in the decimal, nor in the centesimal, but in the infinitesimal position. The brilliant people who developed the theory of limits concluded that a value in an infinitesimal position is infinitely insignificant and therefore equals zero. Is this valid? You would have to read their books to understand (I haven't myself, mind you). But guess what? It works in reality!

Infinitesimal Calculus has been broadly used in science since Newton. It is used, for example, to know the volume of complex geometrical shapes: For example, Calculus says that an infinitesimal lenght of a circumference is a straight line. If we apply this logic we can know the equation of the volume of any sphere or section of a sphere. That is how we know the formulas of many geometric figures, and can be proven empirically.

Last, I want to say that Arithmetics is flawed as you have seen through this topic. But Calculus makes up for those flaws, so Mathematics as a whole is perfect and can accurately describe reality. You would have to master every field of math to realize how perfect it is.

[edit on 20-4-2008 by Halicarnassus]

[edit on 20-4-2008 by Halicarnassus]

[edit on 20-4-2008 by Halicarnassus]

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Halicarnassus
You would have to master every field of math to realize how perfect it is.

Oh, I totally agree. I would not for one second say that Mathematics is flawed though. I do cognize its perfection. Thank you for the limits demonstration, though ALLisONE, seemingly a computer programmer, doesn't yet show that he comprehends such aspects of mathematics.

ALLisONE; You're now saying that .999... is incomplete but earlier you were saying that there is .000...1 left over. So you're contradicting yourself again, but at least you're coming around to realizing that it is immeasurable, thus immovable, ergo incomplete - infinite. Infinity is a completely incomplete concept. There can only be one infinity and that infinity has no beginning and no end, hence it is incomplete, BUT there is ONE infinity, therefore it is of an immeasurable completeness and absolutely so of its ONE INFINITE self.

Everything (states of energy, since that's what we deal with in reality [matter, waves, etc.]) is by default ONE and every ONE is by default INFINITE (because every one is interconnected with everything else of existence). Why is this? Because the universe is an INFINITE ONE. (There is not space in reality for TWO infinities! ONLY ONE)

In reality ALLisONE, NOTHING is (N)EVER EQUAL to the derivatives of THING and any prefixes that it carries.

All things are interchangable and intermorphable and so is eternity. No ONE is RIGHT and no ONE is wrong, but there is always the ETERNAL UNO (yoo- know!

[edit on 20-4-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 11:55 AM
reply to post by American Mad Man

your right.... point 9 never, never, equals 1. no matter hgow you do the math. grade school reasoning.

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 03:18 PM
If 0.333.....x 3 = 0.9999..... then 0.333...x 4 = 1.333......2

lets continue this theory
1/3 x 30 would = 9.99999....0

so 30/3 is equal to 9 with 9 repeating infinitly, but stoping 1 digit before infinity. so infinity - 1 9's. i thought that infinity went on forever, what gives?

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 04:28 PM
reply to post by cucuto89

I have no idea what you're presenting. Could you please explain it a little more?

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 06:37 PM
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal

ughhhh, had a good thing typed then got page cannot be displayed when i tryed to preview, so sorry for the quickness of this

from the 1/3, 0.333.... proof, you add 0.333...*3 to get 0.9999....., keep doing this, and you get
0.333...*4 = 1.333......2 the 2 is the last digit in the sequence
0.333...*5 = 1.666......5
continue doing this, and you see, that just the last digit in the sequence changes.
0.3333....*30 = 9.999......0
I bring up the *30 equation because it puts a 0 at the end, effectivly making it 1 digit shorter. however, we know that the 9's should go on infinitly, so infinity - 1 = ?

I think that this change in the last digit making the number 1 digit shorter. could be why the 1/3, 0.333 theory comes out as 0.999... and not 1. that 1/infinity difference between 1 and 0.999... is because we cannot approximate 0.333... as anything short of 1/3

this also screws up the 10x, 9x=9 theory, because they use 10 * 0.999... which is the same as 30 * 0.333... the reasoning in that theory is that the number goes on infinitly so that it puts an extra 9 in there because it has no end. however, as i showed above, the 0.333 * 30 WOULD put a 0 at the end of the string, and would therefore not have another 9 at the end to make the equation nice and even.
it would be something like

- 9.999...0
and the second term would have 1 less 9 than the first term, making the difference
9.0000......9 with a 9 at the "end".

sorry if thats still a little choppy, just trying to explain whats going on in my head right now

[edit on 20-4-2008 by cucuto89]

top topics

<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in