If 0.999.... = 1 , Does 0.00....1 = 0

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cyclogon
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expression 0.00...1 and whether it can be considered equal to 0. Participants explore the implications of defining such an expression, its mathematical validity, and comparisons to other concepts like 0.999....

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the definition of 0.00...1, suggesting it is not well-defined due to the ambiguity of the placement of the digit 1.
  • Others argue that if the string of zeros is infinite, it cannot have an end, thus rendering the expression nonsensical.
  • A participant introduces a limit approach, stating that as n approaches infinity, the expression 1/10^n approaches 0, but emphasizes that this is a limit and not the same as being equal to zero.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of sequences and limits, with some asserting that while the limit is zero, the sequence itself never reaches zero.
  • Some participants clarify that the sequence of numbers converging to zero does not contain zero as an element, highlighting the distinction between limits and actual values.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the expression 0.00...1, with multiple competing views regarding its definition and implications. The discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity in defining the placement of digits in decimal expressions and the implications of infinite sequences. The discussion also touches on the nature of limits and sequences without resolving these complexities.

cyclogon
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Sorry if the question has been asked before, but is there any proof that 0.00...1 equals 0?
Or not, as the case may be
Thanks for any replies :)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What is
cyclogon said:
0.00...1
? Where is the one placed at?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
0.00...1 is not a well-defined expression.

0.00... = 0.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
Here's a more interesting example. Consider the function ##x \longmapsto e^{-(x-n)^2}##. For ##n=10## it looks like

upload_2018-4-22_1-45-15.png

and the greater ##n## is, the more to the right is the bump. The area below the curve is ##\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} e^{-(x-n)^2}\, dx \,=\, \sqrt{\pi}\,##. If we move it to infinity, then it is still the same bump with the same area ##\lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} e^{-(x-n)^2}\, dx \,=\, \sqrt{\pi}##. However, if we first move the bump to infinity, we get ## \lim_{n \to \infty} e^{-(x-n)^2} = 0## and the area ##\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (\lim_{n \to \infty} e^{-(x-n)^2})\,dx ## vanishes with it. This is the same with your ##1##. If we move it to infinity, it vanishes, because wherever we look, we are left from the bump and arbitrary close to zero, the bump is never reached.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-4-22_1-45-15.png
    upload_2018-4-22_1-45-15.png
    3.4 KB · Views: 899
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sysprog, cyclogon and QuantumQuest
There's a huge difference between 0.999... and 0.000...1 that is alluded to in post #2. In the first expression, the ellipsis (...) means that the same pattern of 9 digits repeats endlessly, so that each position to the right of the decimal point contains the digit 9. In the other expression, it's not specified where that 1 digit is, making it not well-defined.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
Perhaps better written as $$\lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{10^n}=0$$

But keep in mind that is the limit. And that is different than zero.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
hi, thanks for all your replies. Sorry about not explaining clearing enough.
The "1" is at the end of a length of infinitely many zeros
ie. 0.0000000...(infinte zeros)...1 Thanks
 
cyclogon said:
hi, thanks for all your replies. Sorry about not explaining clearing enough.
The "1" is at the end of a length of infinitely many zeros
ie. 0.0000000...(infinte zeros)...1
Yes, I think people probably realized that's what you meant, but there is no such thing which is why folks are saying that it's undefined. If you get to a point where you can put a 1, then you are not yet at infinity so your statement is nonsensical/undefined.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
cyclogon said:
The "1" is at the end of a length of infinitely many zeros
ie. 0.0000000...(infinte zeros)...1
This is a self-contradiction: if the string of zeros is infinite, it doesn't have an end. That's why that expression doesn't work isn't used in math.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
  • #10
aheight said:
Perhaps better written as $$\lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{10^n}=0$$

But keep in mind that is the limit. And that is different than zero.
That limit is not different from zero. It is precisely zero. As one can see from the epsilon/delta definition of a limit.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon and phinds
  • #11
russ_watters said:
This is a self-contradiction: if the string of zeros is infinite, it doesn't have an end. That's why that expression doesn't work isn't used in math.
To be picky, one could index the digits in a decimal string over a set of positions with order type omega plus one. The difficulty is not that this is a self-contradiction. The difficulty is that the resulting digit strings do not naturally form an algebraic field.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon and fresh_42
  • #12
jbriggs444 said:
That limit is not different from zero. It is precisely zero. As one can see from the epsilon/delta definition of a limit.

Perhaps I should have said the limit is zero but the sequence 1/10, 1/100, ... is never precisely zero.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
  • #13
aheight said:
Perhaps I should have said the limit is zero but the sequence 1/10, 1/100, ... is never precisely zero.
The sequence, which is just a list of numbers, is never precisely anything. This sequence converges to zero, although no element of the sequence is zero.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon and fresh_42
  • #14
aheight said:
Perhaps I should have said the limit is zero but the sequence 1/10, 1/100, ... is never precisely zero.
I would phrase it that "no term of the sequence is zero".

Edit: Beaten to it by @Mark44
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cyclogon
  • #15
Thank you all, for your time in answering this question. Although I cannot add anything more to the discussion, I am still fascinated by the replies. Thanks :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K