All Big Issues
The Instigator
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Winning
56 Points

# 0.0(r)1=0.0

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 10 votes the winner is...
wjmelements
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 6/14/2009 Category: Miscellaneous Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 2,067 times Debate No: 8624
Debate Rounds (3)

 Pro I will prove my point on a single contention. 1.If 0 repeats infinitely, 1 never occurs. Thus, 0.0(R)1=0.0Report this Argument Con My opponent's claim doesn't really matter, as 0.0(r)1 cannot occur. irrational- (mathematics) containing irrational number: describes a mathematical expression that contains an irrational number http://encarta.msn.com... An irrational number is "any real number that cannot be expressed as the exact ratio of two integers". http://encarta.msn.com... If, as my opponent claims, 1 never occurs because 0 repeats infinitely (I concede this point), then 0.0(r)1 is irrational. Therefore, 0.0(r)1 cannot be equal to a rational number, such as 0.Report this Argument Pro This number is not irrational. Rational numbers terminate or repeat, and this one does both. It repeats for infinity, adds a one and terminates.Report this Argument Con Repeat: -Ending in zero means that it does not repeat indefinitely. Therefore, it is not rational. Terminate: -As already conceded by my opponent, the "1" never occurs. Therefore, the number never terminates and is irrational. The statement that "rational numbers terminate or repeat" is true. They EITHER terminate OR repeat. Trying to make a number do both makes that number irrational. Zero, however, is rational (0 divided by 1). A rational number cannot be declared to be equal to an irrational number, so the resolution is negated.Report this Argument Pro This number IS rational. As we can agree that the one never occurs, the number simply repeats. 0.0(r) repeats and is rational. As the one never occurs, 0.0(r)1=0.0(r)=0.0. Thus, the resolution is proven.Report this Argument Con My opponent again says that the one never occurs. However, it does; otherwise, the number would be notated as 0.0(r). Instead, it is notated as 0.0(r)1. There being the 1 makes it irrational, as it is impossible to notate that a 1 could occur. If the 1 occurs, then the zeros do not repeat. If the zeros do not repeat, the one occurs. So, the number is a paradox that cannot exist. This makes it irrational, as I have shown. Therefore, the number 0.0(r)1 is irrational and not equal to 0.0. The resolution is negated. I thank my opponent for this debate and urge a CON vote.Report this Argument
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tBoonePickens 8 years ago
What a tremendous butt whipping by CON!
Posted by Revolution 8 years ago
Actually, my opponent's "paradox" is simply a mathematical statement.
Posted by Angrypants66 8 years ago
Nah I read the whole thing and Con won. Caught me by surprise to see Con win, well played sir.
Posted by Revolution 8 years ago
It was.
Posted by wjmelements 8 years ago
I hope that wasn't the only reason.
Posted by mongoose 8 years ago
I voted CON, just like to told me to!
Posted by Conor 8 years ago
Massacre.
Posted by Revolution 8 years ago
Correction, vote PRO.
Posted by Revolution 8 years ago
Even so, I should win the vote.
Posted by rougeagent21 8 years ago
Revolution:

You basically said 0(+0) = 0. You added on a non-occurring number that added nothing to the actual number. This wasn't much of a debate.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.