1 is by definition 0.999999999 9?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adarpodracir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition
AI Thread Summary
The discussion confirms that 0.999... is equal to 1, explaining that both expressions represent the same number. This equality is established through the infinite sum of a geometric series, which converges to 1. Additionally, it argues that there is no positive distance between 0.999... and 1, reinforcing their equivalence. The conversation addresses common misconceptions, such as the idea of infinitesimals, clarifying that in the standard real number system, no such differences exist. Overall, the topic illustrates the mathematical principles behind this equality and encourages further exploration of related discussions.
adarpodracir
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

I have a question regarding this statement:

35jvtvt.png


My question is whether we can say so...

Thank you very much!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
OP, the answer is that .999... = 1. It's an equality. They're two expressions that represent the same number.

The reason this is so is that .999... is defined as the infinite sum

9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + ...

This is a geometric series whose sum is 1. This is proven in first-year calculus.

Another way to see it is that there's no distance between the number denoted by .999... and the number denoted by 1. That is, suppose you say, well, .999... is 1/zillion away from1. But I'll just point out that if you take enough 9's, you'll eventually get WITHIN 1/zillion of 1.

So if there's no conceivable positive difference between .999... and 1, then they must represent the same number.

Possible conceptual objections to this reasoning are things like:

* "But how can you have two different expressions for the same number?" Easy. 4 and 2 + 2 are two different expressions for the same number. It happens all the time.

* There must be an "infinitesimal" difference between 1 and .999..." In the standard real number system, there are no infinitesimals. A distance is either zero or positive. Since there's no positive distance between .999... and 1, the distance between them is zero and they're the same number.

Hope this helps. There are discussions of this topic all over the net.
 
Last edited:
There is already a thread about this. Please visit the Frequently Asked Questions subforum.
 
Do you realize the question you ask in your post and the question you ask in the title are quite different?
 
Please read this: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=507001
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Many thanks to all of you for reply. Everything is clear now.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top