Is there a limit to the decimal expression .999?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ram1024
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical interpretation of the decimal expression 0.999..., with participants divided on whether it equals 1. One side argues that 0.999... represents an infinite series that converges to 1, thus making them equal. The opposing view claims that since 0.999... is a limitless process, it never actually reaches 1. The debate highlights misunderstandings about limits and the nature of infinite decimals, with some asserting that 0.999... is a constant value rather than a process. Ultimately, the conversation reflects deep philosophical and mathematical implications regarding infinity and the representation of numbers.
  • #31
If we make a reasonable assumption about zeno's paradox, that both speeds are constant, then it just states that they will not meet before some fixed time (dependent on the ratio between the speeds). given that the observation that zeno's paradox does not stop you overtaking on the motorway, perhaps you ought to look at it and figure out where it's wrong for yourself, ram.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
matt grime said:
If we make a reasonable assumption about zeno's paradox, that both speeds are constant, then it just states that they will not meet before some fixed time (dependent on the ratio between the speeds). given that the observation that zeno's paradox does not stop you overtaking on the motorway, perhaps you ought to look at it and figure out where it's wrong for yourself, ram.

Zeno's Observation is ABSOLUTELY correct. the conclusion he came to is incorrect because of the times he was living in this was a relatively unexplored field.

Tell me where I'm wrong in saying you will NEVER reach 1 in this series outlined in this problem

Object A traveling From Point B to Point C which is a measured distance of 10 meters, and moving at a speed of 10 meters per second.

Object A must first travel 1/2 the distance (5 meters) then 1/2 the remaining distance (2.5 meters) then 1/2 that remaining distance (1.25 meters) etc ad infinitum.

the series has a LIMIT of 10 meters, but the SUM of the series will NEVER be 10 meters. there will ALWAYS be some portion "half distance" left over to travel, infinitely small and beyond human comprehension.

SOMETHING cut into 2 parts will ALWAYS yield SOMETHING. 1/Infinity ≠ 0
 
  • #33
A number inclusive in the set that is comprised of numbers less than infinity and greater than negative-infinity
This is pretty funny. Clearly all that you know about the real number line can be written on a decimal point.
The world of mathematicans defines Infinity as an addition to the Real Number line. In doing so the field nature of the Real numbers is lost. In reality Infinity is not a number, but a definition, part of the definition is how Infinity behaves under each of the operations. It is by DEFINITION that

\frac 1 {\infty} = 0
no i said an infinite number of half-distances will NOT reach a destination
But Since that is a convergernt series, Math says that it DOES reach the end after an infinite number of steps.
 
  • #34
http://home.comcast.net/~rossgr1/Math/one.PDF

I have a sneaking suspicion that you simply do not have enough mathematical sophistication to understand formal proofs, so I doubt that the above link will be meaningful. If you can get yourself out of the lecturing mode into the learning mode you may actually be able to get a glimmer of how mathematic ans look at this problem. In this thread you are arguing with at least one Mathematics PhD and several graduate level math students. Given acess to this level of knowledge it is a shame that you cannot make some effort to learn something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
Integral said:
This is pretty funny. Clearly all that you know about the real number line can be written on a decimal point.
The world of mathematicans defines Infinity as an addition to the Real Number line. In doing so the field nature of the Real numbers is lost. In reality Infinity is not a number, but a definition, part of the definition is how Infinity behaves under each of the operations. It is by DEFINITION that

\frac 1 {\infty} = 0

well that definition is CLEARLY wrong then. I don't know why you guys are using "an infinity" that has clear limits as such, but it's ridiculous.

it's a good thing you guys live in seclusion and never come out to see the real world, because in the real world, something is never nothing, not matter how you cut it.

find me the guy that invented your infinity cause i wish to verbally abuse him.
 
  • #36
Anyways, seeing how everyone participating here other than ram1024 is in agreement on the subject, and ram1024 has rejected all arguments in advance, I see no further point for this thread.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
20K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
32
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K