I Proof: 0.9999 does not equal 1

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math401
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical assertion that 0.999... equals 1, with some participants arguing against this conclusion by claiming that subtracting or adding infinite values is invalid. They argue that treating infinity as a number leads to contradictions, suggesting that the proof is flawed. However, others clarify that 0.999... is defined as the limit of an infinite series, specifically a geometric series, which converges to 1. The conversation highlights the misunderstanding of infinity in mathematical operations. Ultimately, the consensus remains that 0.999... does indeed equal 1, despite the ongoing debate.
Math401
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Or rather counter proof.
They said x=0.999...
10x=9.999...
9x=9.999...-x
9x=9
x=1
but this is obviously wrong, you can't substract infinity from infinity unless you consider infinity a number and if so then you would get 8.99...1 and not 9. either way 0.999...= 1 is wrong. and is not different than saying (0.999...) +x=1.99...8 you can't add an infine amount of nines to an infinite amount of nines or subtract. if you could then you would consider infinity as a number and in that case the proof is also wrong
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
This subject has been discussed many times on PhysicsForums. Please do a search of the forum or look at the "Similar Discussions" links below.

Yes, 0.999... = 1.

HallsofIvy said:
0.999... = 1 because, by the definition of "decimal place notation", 0.999... is the limit of the infinite series .9+ .09+ .009+ ... That's a geometric series and it's easy to show that the limit is 1.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes fresh_42 and jedishrfu
Math401 said:
but this is obviously wrong, you can't substract infinity from infinity
We are not subtracting infinity from infinity here. The subtraction is 9.999... - 0.999..., with each number having an infinite number of 9 digits to the right of the decimal point. The result is 9.000..., with an infinite number of 0 digits to the right of the decimal point.
As DrClaude said, this has been discussed many times here at PF.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
36
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
62
Views
10K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
22K
Back
Top