June 5, 200917 yr So, what is 1.111... equal to? 10/9. Please don't continue. I'm only bumping this because I forgot about this thread. That didn't really answer my question, you know. 10/9 = 1.111... 1.111 * .9 = .999... Therefore, 1.111... = 1 = .999...? <_<
June 5, 200917 yr So, what is 1.111... equal to? 10/9. Please don't continue. I'm only bumping this because I forgot about this thread. That didn't really answer my question, you know. 10/9 = 1.111... 1.111 * .9 = .999... Therefore, 1.111... = .999...? <_< #-o (I was going to look up a facepalm picture but am too lazy). I know you'll need an explanation: 1.11... = 10/9 .9 = 9/10 10/9 * 9/10 obviously equals one. How you thought the "Therefore 1.11...=.99..." was the next part I have no idea.
June 5, 200917 yr 10/9 = 1.111... 9/10 = .9 10/9*9/10 = 1 1.111...*0.9 = .999... 10/9*9/10 = 1.111*0.9 1 = .999... Seriously. Try to prove .999... = 1 wrong. I shall take my flock underneath my own wing, and kick them right the [bleep] out of the tree. If they were meant to fly, they won't break their necks on the concrete.So, what is 1.111... equal to?10/9. Please don't continue.
June 5, 200917 yr So, what is 1.111... equal to? 10/9. Please don't continue. I'm only bumping this because I forgot about this thread. That didn't really answer my question, you know. 10/9 = 1.111... 1.111 * .9 = .999... Therefore, 1.111... = .999...? <_< #-o (I was going to look up a facepalm picture but am too lazy). I know you'll need an explanation: 1.11... = 10/9 .9 = 9/10 10/9 * 9/10 obviously equals one. How you thought the "Therefore 1.11...=.99..." was the next part I have no idea. I don't need an explanation. I'm not that dumb, and I wasn't being totally serious with the whole 1.111 = .999 thing (Hence the "<_<" at the end). In my initial question, I asked what 1.111... was equal to and I got 10/9, which is about as helpful as saying 9/9 equals one. It's assumed that every non-repeating number has an equivalent which can be expressed with 9's (i.e., .8904 = .89039...), right? Well, I was simply asking how that would rule be replied in reverse (i.e., what's the equivalent to a repeating number which doesn't end in 9's). A fairly simple question :P
June 5, 200917 yr The answer to that is yes. 1.01 = 1.0999... , 6743.843 = 6743.842999... etc. I shall take my flock underneath my own wing, and kick them right the [bleep] out of the tree. If they were meant to fly, they won't break their necks on the concrete.So, what is 1.111... equal to?10/9. Please don't continue.
June 5, 200917 yr The answer to what's the equivalent of 1.111... is "yes"? o_O ...it's 10/9, what more do you want? Nevermind, there's no point continuing.
June 5, 200917 yr The answer to what's the equivalent of 1.111... is "yes"? o_O ...it's 10/9, what more do you want? Nevermind, there's no point continuing. I'll just copy and paste what I wrote out earlier. It's assumed that every non-repeating number has an equivalent which can be expressed with 9's (i.e., .8904 = .89039...), right? Well, I was simply asking how that would rule be replied in reverse (i.e., what's the equivalent to a repeating number which doesn't end in 9's). Saying that 1.111... = 10/9 is dumb, because no one is asking what 1.111... expressed in fractions is, as everyone knows what it is expressed in fractions. That's not what I was asking. Sheesh. I mean, I know the answer to the question. Do you?
June 5, 200917 yr The answer to what's the equivalent of 1.111... is "yes"? o_O ...it's 10/9, what more do you want? Nevermind, there's no point continuing. I'll just copy and paste what I wrote out earlier. It's assumed that every non-repeating number has an equivalent which can be expressed with 9's (i.e., .8904 = .89039...), right? Well, I was simply asking how that would rule be replied in reverse (i.e., what's the equivalent to a repeating number which doesn't end in 9's). Saying that 1.111... = 10/9 is dumb, because no one is asking what 1.111... expressed in fractions is, as everyone knows what it is expressed in fractions. That's not what I was asking. Sheesh. I mean, I know the answer to the question. Do you? Good grief. There is no eternal 9 ending to what 1.111... equals. Because all there is an infinate amount of 1's. I shall take my flock underneath my own wing, and kick them right the [bleep] out of the tree. If they were meant to fly, they won't break their necks on the concrete.So, what is 1.111... equal to?10/9. Please don't continue.
June 6, 200917 yr I believe that we should not use 0.99... and we should instead always use 1. If it's the same number, why bother?
June 6, 200917 yr Hmm I found it funny that I put 0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999 * 1 in a graphing calculator and the answer was 1. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~
June 6, 200917 yr Hmm I found it funny that I put 0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999 * 1 in a graphing calculator and the answer was 1. Graphing calculators usually round to the 8th decimal place or so.
June 7, 200917 yr 0.999... is equal to one, its very simple. You just can't think of 0.999... as a "number" per se. People are used to numbers like 4, 2, 193.82, and so forth Then you have 'number' like 0.333... people think of this as the number 0.3 followed by a million 3's. This is misleading. The written expression 0.3333... isn't a number like that, 0.3333... is one third. Yes when you write it you use numbers, but its not really a integer, its the way of writing 1/3 using a decimal.
June 8, 200917 yr I was in disbelief but I asked me Math teacher and she proved it in a few different ways, cool stuff. Isn't it lovely how having an opinion makes you hated around here?
June 8, 200917 yr My driving teacher told me about this :lol: Apparently it has to do with something with logarithms as 0.999......... curves into the infinity of 1 :-k
June 9, 200917 yr Well, not only that, any number that doesn't terminate or repeat is an irrational number, isn't it? I believe so. A number that cannot be represented as a fraction, does not terminate, or does not repeat. Such as pi. [hide=Thanks Wikipedia]*The ratio of the hypotenuse to an arm of an isosceles right triangle is a:b expressed in the smallest units possible. *By the Pythagorean theorem: a^2 = 2b^2. *Since a^2 is even, a must be even as the square of an odd number is odd. *Since a:b is in its lowest terms, b must be odd. *Since a is even, let a = 2y. *Then a^2 = 4y^2 = 2b^2 *b^2 = 2y^2 so b^2 must be even, therefore b is even. *However we asserted b must be odd. Here is the contradiction[/hide]
Create an account or sign in to comment