There are people who just have to "crucify" what they think is wrong. I think there are things like this that sometimes we just don't really understand but it doesn't necessarily make it wrong even though we perceive it so.

Well it won't drastically change our lives by knowing it or anything that's for sure, but its just one of those interesting facts. It's cool to know

(September 22, 2009 at 6:03 pm)Saerules Wrote: Establishment doesn't make something right 1/3 is an approximation, because 1 does not perfectly divide into three parts. 1/2, on the other hand, divides perfectly into 0.5.

This has got to be my favourite post yet.

This is just a matter of something being counter-intuitive...

EvF

A circle represents fractional division. A circle is made for fractions... but when you use decimals and percentages: you will find circles lacking. Once again, you can make any number of 1/__ fractions, that when multiplied by their denominator: become one. When you try to express these fractions in decimals form however... what you get is imperfection.

Look at it this way. You can easily change 1/3 into the imperfect decimal estimation of .3^. Then you can even call this 33.3^%. While you could have multiplied the fraction by three to obtain one... when you multiply either the decimal or percentage estimations: you get .9^ or 99.9^%. That is neither 1, nor is it 100%. You can add an endless number of nines... but you will never have 1, nor 100%, from adding another nine. With every nine you add... you will get closer... but the simple fact of the matter is this: you will never reach it. You can forever have 9s added... and you will just as so never reach one.

Numbers are infinite, therefore you will infinitely be getting closer to one. But there is a difference between almost one, and reaching it. The difference is negligible, but the difference is there. In no realm but fractions is what you say true.

Saerules,

Our universe acts through quantum jumps along a continuous scale, so while you are technically correct there is no practical application for your knowledge. For example, we have no knife sharp enough and no optical device acurate enough to actually cut a pie into exact thirds. So, while this is an interesting thought experiment I still see no practical application for it. My mind is programmed to comprehend in statistical ways through my work so infinity and 0 are concepts that are mostly useless to me and have no practical application.

It is entertaining to watch people try to conquer this windmill though. Don Quixote would be proud.

Rhizo

As I said, lets just let it rest because, while it is an interesting piece of information, its controversial in a sense so lets just agree to disagree and move on lol

Retorth,

There is no "moving on" there is only new topic starting. If you can't help but click topics when they are lit up that is your problem. I have the same problem. This topic is shiney and interesting so your challenge is to make a new shinier topic.

lol,
Rhizo

I stand corrected.

Let us agree to disagree and move on....to new topics!

(September 22, 2009 at 5:49 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: They are both infintes, and according to Adrian subtracting infinites gives zero.

No, they are both infinitely long, not infinites. Big difference. Infinity - Infinity = 0 because anything taken away from itself is 0.

(September 22, 2009 at 6:01 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: I call bollocks on this mathematical truth. If I am wrong, so be it, but I've seen nothing convincing me that a number smaller than 1 equals 1.

That's the point though. It's not a smaller number than one. By definition two numbers cannot be the same if they are different amounts. The point is that 0.999... is provably equal to 1, as demonstrated to you multiple times. Read the Wikipedia article if you doubt it's mathematically true, and if you still aren't convinced, find a mathematician and ask them.

(September 22, 2009 at 6:03 pm)Saerules Wrote: Establishment doesn't make something right 1/3 is an approximation, because 1 does not perfectly divide into three parts. 1/2, on the other hand, divides perfectly into 0.5.

1/3 isn't an approximation, it's technically more accurate than 0.333... since 0.333... is infinitely long and can never be written fully. However since 0.333... is a real number, it exists.

(September 23, 2009 at 12:50 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I think it is the mathmatical equivalent of the equivocation fallacy but I can't proove it. I know of no application for this fact in engineering, biology, or even psychology so I feel no great reason to agree or dissagree with it.

It's not a fallacy. Point out the error in my calculation.

(September 23, 2009 at 1:16 pm)Retorth Wrote: I stand corrected.

Let us agree to disagree and move on....to new topics!

but this isn't a matter of opinion. Its a matter of established mathematics which if ever proved wrong would spell fame and fortune for who ever proves it wrong. 6 pages in, the effort to prove it wrong seems to be giving up. No fame or fortune for anyone I suppose.

(September 23, 2009 at 1:16 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(September 23, 2009 at 12:50 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I think it is the mathmatical equivalent of the equivocation fallacy but I can't proove it. I know of no application for this fact in engineering, biology, or even psychology so I feel no great reason to agree or dissagree with it.

It's not a fallacy. Point out the error in my calculation.

I love that calculation, its very clever. Thanks for sharing it.