Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #1001 20120624 23:01:48
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?You can perceive 3 because it is part of decimal system. Human developed numbers according to our fingers. How many fingers do you have? 10...so what is 3? ..one two three fingers..can you calculate 1/2? yes..0.5 or half fingers..can you quantify 1/3..no way..until forever 3333333 would go on. There is no absolute value you can quantify from 1/3 using our finger system or decimal! Infinity is a concept but numbers is real..if you play with infinity then you compromise many things. Therefore, anything deals with the infinity like irrational numbers decimal places..you can never actually write it down, the fraction we representing them is more like a symbol not a value. I can prove you that 0.999999999.. can never be 1 because (10.99999999999..)x infinity not equal to zero. Yet (11) x infinity=0! Can you give me three apples? Yes you can but can you give me exactly apples? I hope you could:)I think we human didn't invent numbers because it is already there even before we existed. We discovered mathematics and we don't invent anything dealing with mathematics. For example, Pythagoras didn't invent his theorem but he discovered it. This is because the movement our our galaxy, sun, earth, planets etc involved Pythagoras mathematics long before we existed on this planet. Basically x^0=1 because and Mathematics is a knowledge field that depend on proof because if anything could contradict it, would prove it wrong. Pythagoras believed that numbers were not only the way to truth, but truth itself. http://www.ancient.eu.com/article/213/ . While a concept not always true, could be wrong sometimes! Last edited by Stangerzv (20120624 23:04:10) #1002 20120625 00:29:31
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?hi Stangerzv You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei #1003 20120625 10:47:28
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?*Pythagoras was not the world's first mathematician. * I didn't say he was the first mathematicians but I gave his name as example. Mathematics was there even before human were first on earth. This universe is governed by mathematics billions years ago, I think the first concept of singularity ever known to us is the creation of this universe, when t=0, the volume of universe is zero but with infinite density. If you read the Hindus manuscripts you would find that they had done earlier many of the mathematics found in Europe or Middle East. Yet Hindus civilization not even older than the Sumerian in Iraq, Sumerians had Pythagorean triple ages ago written on stone tablet. Where ever you found wheel or circle, then you can find pi and Pythagoras theorem. Now they found a new civilization in Turkey dated back 12,000 years and they predated the invention of wheels. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ0ViMVxKZA&feature=related Last edited by Stangerzv (20120625 11:13:16) #1004 20120625 11:02:40
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Yes that is true. Numbers, as a concept, existed since always. But it doesn't change the fact that the imaginary unit, i, is not as real as the number 3. Actually, they are neither real (in the sense that they don't exist). There are only there representations, wheter they are apples or graphic representations i.e. digits. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1005 20120625 11:11:43
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Sorry anonimnystefy..not mass but density. Like the birth of supernova, in the beginning of its creation, the mass of 1 miligram of it could be several times or perhaps million times more dense than our entire solar system masses combined together. I think imaginary numbers are like the images in the mirror, they look real but just images and they need real things to exist. #1006 20120625 11:17:27
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?That's okay then. I don't know how much astrophysicists would agree with you, but we are doing math here. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1007 20120625 11:50:17
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?To be honest we are not real too:) Nothing is real actually in this world, our intelligence is about comparing things, the unit of Energy Joule is not exactly a unit of energy in real sense but representation of comparison what this guy name could do to a temperature etc. Even a meter length is not real but a comparison of a metal bar stored somewhere in France. Numbers act the same ways too. They are there for us to compare but there are numbers we can't compared like irrational, imaginary and infinity numbers. Basically, astrophysics got to do with mathematics, like singularity 1/0, it doesn't exist in our limited knowledge yet it does exist in the formation of this universe or black holes for examples. The 0.99999999.... is the same thing as playing with singularity, to get 0.99999..you need to do this 1/(1000000..recurring zeros until infinity and at the end of infinity you need to finish it with digit 1). Maybe all numbers are real, even the irrational, imaginary,infinity etc but our brain capacity couldn't cope with it. Like we could have a perfect circle yet pi is irrational. We could draw a perfect square with a unit sides yet we failed to measure its diagonal with 100% accuracy. We can see it yet we can't measure accurately 100%, it is sad somehow:). There is limitation in us to understand all mathematics but if there is the One who invented mathematics that we found in this universe He must be endless genius and He is either infinite or more than it. #1008 20120625 12:19:05
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?First, I must say that you are definitely right about on thing and that's that no unit of measure is real in the everyday sense of the word. You can have a 220 volts light bulb, but you cannot 220 volts. Most discussion about realness of a measure is that of a second. Time is something that causes much debate. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1009 20120625 15:13:32
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Of course you are right! I didn't mean all numbers are real of course there are imaginary numbers etc. But in sense of human capability of understanding it, even when it is real number it doesn't looks real to our understanding like the value of pi, we can have exact circle yet the pi in it is irrational, it is a mystery. I just pointing that, that even the so call imaginary numbers does exist in many real things or coexist with real numbers like roots of equation. Not people like Ramanujan formulated 1+2+3+4...=1/12 got carried away? Maths were based on thinking and opinions of people and there are some maths which were considered fringe science and later on were proven to be true. Words or languages evolved through times and we human made them, English didn't exist 50,000 thousands years ago, same with the word GOOGLE, this word wasn't there before us. Unless you do believe that human was from Adam and Eve and they already made with language embedded in them. Mathematics is the only thing that you can make all people to agree 100% that something is true or not, our opinions differ but not the mathematics. Pythagoras Theorem doesn't need our opinion to be true, itself is true, we give opinions and the true opinion will fill in the gap eventually. This is why you can give your opinions what ever you like because restricting opinions would make Mathematics static. From garbage opinions there could be something true. #1010 20120625 17:07:43
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi Stangerzv; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #1011 20120625 18:05:24
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi Bobbym! By letting s=2, this equation would give you 4 not (pi^2)/6. As for integers I am done with them, I had formulated enough formulation for them on my capability. Now I am working on nonintegers but not like whole numbers, what you get from nonintegers is approximation. I have developed numerical analysis for nonintegers power like how to add this equation , the method not that amazing because sometimes it takes you to infinity to calculate a simple value. Last edited by Stangerzv (20120625 18:06:55) #1012 20120625 21:43:20
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?I have a question for zeta function summation. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1013 20120625 22:51:12
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?
Now you are contradicting yourself. If all mathematical concepts were created by some supreme being before the humans, then shouldn't the same be true for words. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1014 20120627 19:48:16
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?This Sounds like a Real Problem! #1015 20120627 21:21:08
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?hi TESTU
Mmmmm. But there are only a finite number of stars. And you could just as easily call the box 'fred' You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei #1016 20120627 22:13:27
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Can I answer this one? Can I? The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1017 20120627 22:32:55
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Have to Correct You Bob! There can only be a finite number of stars!... If the Whole Universe has been Mapped!? Last edited by TESTU (20120628 00:51:26) #1018 20120627 22:52:18
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi TESTU The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment #1019 20120627 23:46:34
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi TESTU; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #1020 20120628 18:13:41
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Quote: "A frog starts hopping at point A. His first hop is 1 metre. His second is 1/2 metre. His third is 1/4 metre. And so on, each hop half the size of the one before. #1021 20120628 18:35:24
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi anonimnystefy Setting p=s Taking limit n to infinity and simplifying the coefficients yields, Further simplifying you get the equation above. Take note that when p is nonintegers, the coefficients of sums of power become unbounded. Last edited by Stangerzv (20120628 18:51:02) #1022 20120628 19:11:56
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi Testu #1023 20120628 21:35:11
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi Stangerzv 1/0 = 1 Because No Value has been Divided into the Start Value of 1 #1024 20120628 23:13:02
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?Hi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #1025 20120628 23:21:26
Re: 0.9999....(recurring) = 1?
As I said before, scientists already know that the universe is finite, although still expanding. The number of particles is roughly around 10^80. Just because somewhere in the history of the universe its density was infinite doesn't mean that it has either infinite size or volume. The limit operator is just an excuse for doing something you know you can't. “It's the subject that nobody knows anything about that we can all talk about!” ― Richard Feynman “Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most.” ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment 