Is 0.9999... Equal to 1? Debunking the Myth and Understanding the Concept

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raza
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error
Raza
Messages
203
Reaction score
0
At first, when I saw this, I was deeply shocked and lost the believe that math is absolute. Like the thinking that if Math can prove it, it must exist and if it can't, it doesn't exist.

So is 0.99999...=1 illogical?

also, is it fair to say that 1.00=1?

Sorry if this question is already posted or it's in the wrong forum.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
0.99999(9) is 1
It's right and logical. Unfortunately, I don't remember the prove now, it was on the first grade in University.
 
This has been slogged out many times: there's no need for another discussion thread.
 
The real question, Raza, is do you know what 0.9999... means? If not, you certainly can't say that 0.9999...= 1 is an error! If you believe you do, what do you think 0.9999... means? The fact that you ask if 1.00= 1 makes me wonder.
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top