Just when I thought I knew everything.

[aeviaanah]

.999 infinity does truly in fact = 1.

1/3 = .333 infinity
1/3 * 3 = 1
.333 infinity * 3 = .999 infinity
Therefore...
.999 infinity = 1

Your turn...

 

[day_trippr]

I spy with my little eye...a rounding error.

So...one of us needs more beer for this theorem to prove valid...

Cheers!

 

[lumpher]

A fallacy exists. Return to 6th grade and start again.

 

[Qhrumphf]

.333 infinity * 3 = .999 infinity

And there's your problem.

 

[max384]

.999 infinity does truly in fact = 1.

1/3 = .333 infinity
1/3 * 3 = 1
.333 infinity * 3 = .999 infinity
Therefore...
.999 infinity = 1

Your turn...

Making this jump is where your reasoning and math fails. Don't worry though. Have a beer my friend!

 

[max384]

However, if you want to make your brain itch, consider this: (... Meaning to infinity)
1/9=0.111...
2/9=0.222...
3/9=0.333...
4/9=0.444...
5/9=0.555...
6/9=0.666...
7/9=0.777...
8/9=0.888...
9/9=?

 

[Qhrumphf]

However, if you want to make your brain itch, consider this: (... Meaning to infinity)
1/9=0.111...
2/9=0.222...
3/9=0.333...
4/9=0.444...
5/9=0.555...
6/9=0.666...
7/9=0.777...
8/9=0.888...
9/9=?

Makes perfect sense when you stop trying to rationalize an irrational number. The same problem with the OP's math. There's a reason why leaving things as fractions is often better...

Edit: yeah, my terminology is wrong, they're not actually irrational numbers. But my point remains valid. What I get for not taking math class in 12 years.

 

[lumpher]

However, if you want to make your brain itch, consider this: (... Meaning to infinity)
1/9=0.111...
2/9=0.222...
3/9=0.333...
4/9=0.444...
5/9=0.555...
6/9=0.666...
7/9=0.777...
8/9=0.888...
9/9=?

Those are not exact. They are the closest mathmetic equivalents we use to wrap our little minds around the concept.

 

[max384]

Those are not exact. They are the closest mathmetic equivalents we use to wrap our little minds around the concept.

This simply isn't true. 1/3 is EXACTLY 0.333 to infinity. It is not an approximation. It is only an approximation if it does not continue to infinity.

 

[interference]

0.99999999... = 1.00000000...

The best explanation I've heard for why I believe OP is correct, (if the zeroes are added) is that it is not possible to place a number between 0.nines forever and 1.zeros forever on a number line, therefore they must be at the same place on the number line.

 

[Homercidal]

What is number line?

 

[lumpher]

This simply isn't true. 1/3 is EXACTLY 0.333 to infinity. It is not an approximation. It is only an approximation if it does not continue to infinity.

No, it is not exact. Why do you think it has to continue to infinity? Because no matter how many 3's you add, it will NEVER be precise. A precise fraction is 1 that can terminate, such as 1/4. There are "terminating decimals" and there are "repetends", or "repeating decimals".

 

[Auger]

There are "terminating decimals" and there are "repetends".

Well lets not resort to name calling...

 

[lumpher]

Ok. I'll be the first to admit I hate math anyway, so why am I even talking about it? :smack:

 

[max384]

No, it is not exact. Why do you think it has to continue to infinity? Because no matter how many 3's you add, it will NEVER be precise. A precise fraction is 1 that can terminate, such as 1/4. There are "terminating decimals" and there are "repetends", or "repeating decimals".

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Do you know what the term infinity means? When a repeating decimal is written to infinity (line or dot over the repeating decimal), it is an EXACT representation of the fraction.

 

[lumpher]

Ok, NOW I get it. 9.999999... = 100/10. You win. Cheers, and thanks for the explanation.

 

[Qhrumphf]

This is one of those cases where mathematical definitions stand at odds with basic logic. A cannot simultaneously be A and not A. Approaches does not mean equals

 

[Sailingeric]

If you want to tickle your brain with some number stuff, check out Numberphile on youtube. Good stuff https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoxcjq-8xIDTYp3uz647V5A

 

[aeviaanah]

This is one of those cases where mathematical definitions stand at odds with basic logic. A cannot simultaneously be A and not A. Approaches does not mean equals

This is the best argument I've heard against the premise.
I have a hard time saying that we can cheat math tho. It either works or it doesn't.