Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

# 0.999 (Repeating) is equal to 1

 Posts: 2,621 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AMPosted: 3 years agoThis blows my mind, here is the proof via algebra:(R means repeating)(1/9)=0.111(R)9x(1/9)=0.111(R)1=0.999(R)Its so interesting how this works, normally I have limited interest in mathematics, but this takes the cake.https://en.wikipedia.org..."Hate begets hate"
 Posts: 1 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 4:59:50 PMPosted: 3 years agoHere's another way to understand 0.99 (repeating) is equal to 1:1/3=0.33 (repeating)1/3*3=10.33 (repeating)*3=0.99 (repeating)=1There are several other "proofs".
 Posts: 6,110 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 8:16:12 PMPosted: 3 years agohttp://www.debate.org...just 1/3 is .3 repeating, the decimal is the real number 1/3.The reason why it is not an easy to see integer is because the ration 1/3 is applied to a base 10 system. In hexadecimal 1/3 is .5 repeating.It's a real number. But it's not a real quantity that is infinitely growing large.It's a common confusion to think a number that expands infinitely is somehow infinite itself. it isn't. It's just one representation of it is with remainder.
 Posts: 3,981 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 8:36:42 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AM, Axonly wrote:So 1+1 = 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R)If this is the case then:So 1+1 = 1.888 (R) ?Because this is the result of 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R).If they are the same then the result of this equation should be the same."Life calls the tune, we dance." John Galsworthy
 Posts: 6,110 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 8:51:00 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 1/31/2016 8:36:42 PM, famousdebater wrote:At 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AM, Axonly wrote:So 1+1 = 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R)If this is the case then:So 1+1 = 1.888 (R) ?Because this is the result of 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R).If they are the same then the result of this equation should be the same.Maybe you should type that into a calculator.If you type in .9999999999999999999999999 add to .9999999999999999999999999You will get 1.99999999999999999999999998That 8 is only because I could not type in .9 repeating. Essentially that 8 would never be present in .9 repeating plus .9 repeating.So .9... plus .9... equals 1.9... which is 1+ .9... which is equivalent to 1+1 which equals 2.Again when we correct for 1.8 error the conjecture holds true .9 repeating equals 1.
 Posts: 3,981 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 8:52:00 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 1/31/2016 8:51:00 PM, Mhykiel wrote:At 1/31/2016 8:36:42 PM, famousdebater wrote:At 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AM, Axonly wrote:So 1+1 = 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R)If this is the case then:So 1+1 = 1.888 (R) ?Because this is the result of 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R).If they are the same then the result of this equation should be the same.Maybe you should type that into a calculator.If you type in .9999999999999999999999999 add to .9999999999999999999999999You will get 1.99999999999999999999999998That 8 is only because I could not type in .9 repeating. Essentially that 8 would never be present in .9 repeating plus .9 repeating.So .9... plus .9... equals 1.9... which is 1+ .9... which is equivalent to 1+1 which equals 2.Again when we correct for 1.8 error the conjecture holds true .9 repeating equals 1.So irl if you were asked 1+1 you would answer 1.9999 (R)?"Life calls the tune, we dance." John Galsworthy
 Posts: 6,110 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 8:59:26 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 1/31/2016 8:52:00 PM, famousdebater wrote:At 1/31/2016 8:51:00 PM, Mhykiel wrote:At 1/31/2016 8:36:42 PM, famousdebater wrote:At 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AM, Axonly wrote:So 1+1 = 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R)If this is the case then:So 1+1 = 1.888 (R) ?Because this is the result of 0.999 (R) + 0.999 (R).If they are the same then the result of this equation should be the same.Maybe you should type that into a calculator.If you type in .9999999999999999999999999 add to .9999999999999999999999999You will get 1.99999999999999999999999998That 8 is only because I could not type in .9 repeating. Essentially that 8 would never be present in .9 repeating plus .9 repeating.So .9... plus .9... equals 1.9... which is 1+ .9... which is equivalent to 1+1 which equals 2.Again when we correct for 1.8 error the conjecture holds true .9 repeating equals 1.So irl if you were asked 1+1 you would answer 1.9999 (R)?Please refer to my previous debate on this subject http://www.debate.org...I would reply with 2. But I also would not state 2 is the only way to answer it.Do you understand that 4 = 2^2= (2+2) = W30;16 = (1+3) = 4/1 = (4/2+4/2) = ect...There are more then one way to answer and yet the answers be the same quantity.what is 1/3 plus 2/3? If you keep them as fractions you have 3/3 which simplifies to 1.But if you do the division which is the fraction sign you get .99 repeating.Again 1 and .999 is equal. 2 different ways of saying the same thing.
 Posts: 4,407 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 9:12:26 PMPosted: 3 years agoDidn't see this before I made my OP...
 Posts: 13,527 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 11:02:56 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 1/31/2016 1:57:48 AM, Axonly wrote:This blows my mind, here is the proof via algebra:(R means repeating)(1/9)=0.111(R)9x(1/9)=0.111(R)1=0.999(R)Its so interesting how this works, normally I have limited interest in mathematics, but this takes the cake.https://en.wikipedia.org...The problem with this proof is that it takes for granted that which it attempts to justify. If .111 is actually equal to 1/9, rather than a mere approximation of it, then yes, .999 = 1. But that's kind of a lot to assume, since it's the exact question at issue. It's just the assumption restated in a different way, namely that you can assert the equivalence of two things by defining their difference to be so small as to be unspecifiable in precise mathematical terms.
 Posts: 6,568 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 1/31/2016 11:43:51 PMPosted: 3 years agoYeah, that's not really a very good proof. The better one that tends to be more convincing is:.999... = .999...x1010(.999...) = 9.999...-.999...9(.999...)=9/9.999...=1Stooge the Worst #StandWithBossy #UnbanTheCuntMan "bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind" ~mysteriouscrystals "I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way." ~F-16 "SeventhProfessor is actually a surprisingly good poster." ~Devilry https://docs.google.com...
© 2019 Debate.org. All rights reserved.