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

# Three equals zero

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Lexus
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 5/13/2015 Category: Miscellaneous Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 1,168 times Debate No: 75254
Debate Rounds (4)

33 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by salam.morcos 2 years ago
@daem0n - Good math work. I'm glad you figured it out. Just for fun, do you know that 3=0! :) Here is another way. Let be know if you can find it.

4 = 4
4 - 4 = 4 - 4
since (a^2 - b^2) = (a-b)(a+b)
also (a*b - a*c) = a (b-c)

(2+2)(2-2) = 2 (2-2)

cancel out the right sides

(2+2) = 2

Therefore 4 = 2
2 = 1 (divide by 2)
3 = 2 (add 1 to each side)
1 = 0 (minus 2 to each side)

Since 0 = 1, 1 = 2 and 2 = 3, then 0 = 3.

Enjoy :)
Posted by daem0n 2 years ago
Another way to expand and simplify 2(.99999...) is this:

2(.99999...)
= 2(9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...)
= 2(9/10) + 2(9/100) + 2(9/1000) + ...
= 18/10 + 18/100 + 18/1000 + ...
= (10/10 + 8/10) + (10/100 + 8/100) + (10/1000 + 8/1000) + ...
= (1/1 + 8/10) + (1/10 + 8/100) + (1/100 + 8/1000) + ...
= 1/1 + (8/10 + 1/10) + (8/100 + 1/100) + ...
= 1/1 + 9/10 + 9/100 + ...
= 1/1 + (9/10 + 9/100 + ...)
= 1/1 + .99999...
= 1 + 1
= 2
Posted by daem0n 2 years ago
Con needed to identify the fallacy in Pro's attempt at a mathematical proof. Here is how to do that:

Line 5 in Pro"s argument:

1 = .99999...

Good so far. Line 6:

2(1) = 2(.99999)

Pro forgot the ellipsis. Pro should have written "2(1) = 2(.99999...)". But otherwise, good so far.

The derivation Pro uses to turn the right hand side of line 6 into the RHS of line 7:

2(.99999...) = 1.999...8

is incorrect. Pro does not know the meaning of ".99999..." It is shorthand for:

9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...

Therefore, two things:

First: "1.999...8" is meaningless. There is no way to translate that shorthand into a sum. (What is 8 supposed to be divided by?) No mathematical proof can be derived from a meaningless statement.

Second, when the expression "2(.99999...)" is validly expanded and simplified, 2 is derived.

2(.99999...)
= 2(9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...)
= 2(9/10) + 2(9/100) + 2(9/1000) + ...
= (9/10 + 9/10) + (9/100 + 9/100) + (9/1000 + 9/1000) + ...
= (9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...) + (9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...)
= .99999... + .99999...
= 1 + 1
= 2

All this tells us is that 2 = 2, which tells us nothing. No mathematical proof can be derived from a statement that tells us nothing.
Posted by tejretics 2 years ago
Poor Con.
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
@NGEpical simplification does not have to be done to two sides.
I meant simplify the right side into a decimal, not a fraction. This is alowed in mathematics.
Posted by live4ever 2 years ago
@lexus unfortunately that cant be done. Not all numbers have an exact decimal equivalent. Besides you should be able to understand that 0.3333333... isn't an exact third no matter how many recurring 3's there are. why do you think the 3's recur infinitely? Because its not a perfect third. If it were a perfect third the recurring 3's will terminate.
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
@live4ever please send me a file containing the exact number of 1/3 in decimal. all numbers have a decimal. please send me the one for 1/3. be exact, not approximate
Posted by live4ever 2 years ago
@lexus. the link you sent me has the exact answer of 1/3 and that is 1/3. this is the simplist exact form it can be. The decimal exact equilavelent does not exist but 0.333333... is the closest approximation. That's why the 3's at the end of 0.3333333... goes on infinetly as it keeps getting closer to equaling 1/3 but can never get there.
Posted by NGEpical 2 years ago
"1/3 = 1/3 (Simplify the right side)
1/3 = .33333... (Multiply by three)
3/3 = .99999... (Simplify left side)
1 = .99999... (Double values present)"

This doesn't work, you have to simplify both sides before moving on, you can't simplify one side then do something to both, THEN simplify the other, it doesn't equate.
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
@live4ever, please send me a file containing the exact value of 1/3, not approximate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.