Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

well on another site they are having a hugr argument over this. its actully kinda funny, but anyways, this one guy said .9~(if you dont no what ~ means it means repeating, going on forever.) = 1 but then people say that .9~ can never reach 1 becuase the 9's never end so it cant reach 1. I think that .9~ = 1 because of these reasons post by some guys.



"1/3 + 2/3 = 1
1/3= .3333~
2/3= .6666~
.3333~ + .6666~ = .9999~
.9999~ = 1"


Do 1/9 on a calculator (I mean, do the actual division.). What do you get? 0.11~.

2/9 = 0.22~
3/9 = 0.33~
4/9 = 0.44~

Do you see a pattern yet?

8/9 = 0.88~
9/9 = 0.99~ = 1"


what do yous think? The agruement is so funny though, its already on page 6 or 7.

....I'm so confused

.........

I just got out of school buddy.

yes i see the pattern

but what do i have to multiply .11 by to give me 1 ?

i dont know

lol now they are on the 8th page now argueing about it

wow i so didnt even bother reading that

Originally posted by xLiNdS x 622x
wow i so didnt even bother reading that ooo....took the words right outta my mouth

That's so interesting

lol.. it actully isnt interesting, the only reason i posted it is becasue they argued for about 8 pages on it, and i wanted to see what you would say

He is right. It goes by the same logic in number theory as the "anything over zero is undefined" rule.

For example, 1/infinity = 0. Nothing divided by anything equals zero, unless the numerator is zero, generally speaking. However, since infinity is considered neverending, whenever a number is divided by it, it is considered, in several branches of math, to be equal to zero. So, the principle is that when a number is infinitely close to something, it is considered equal to it (infinitely similar = same).

Also, by the transitive property of equality, since ~0.9 is equal to 9/9 and 9/9 is equal to one, ~0.9 = 1.

But anyways, he's right (depending slightly on which branch of math/physics/chemistry you're discussing). Sorry to bother you, sir. I hope that that was helpful.

Damn, I didn't see that thing about it not being interesting! I'm such a fool...

however...if you take the sum of xy over ab squared multiplied by n-2x to the tenth power subsect 3 minus quadrant bc subdivided by n squared assuming the hypotenuse is less than or equal to 0 times the right angle of c minus d times pi over yadayadayada blahblahblah.....

if you're not going to post something constructive, perhaps it'd be better to just not post

I've had similar arguments before...I once tried arguing with a teacher that zero and nothing (nullset) were the same thing if you actually wanted to apply these things to RL...that one was undecided

ah crap...this is the otf, not the gdf...

carry on

yayness!!!

Yeah. I could certainly identify more with him than, say, Glorfindel. As a person, I mean. The guy wasn't so, well, goody-goody, which I came to respect.

Its not exactly the same.
But for all applicable reasons they are.

See my post. No offense, sir. I am agreeing with you - I just wanted to explain myself.