Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 12, 2024, 7:09 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
#11
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:21 pm)rocinantexyz Wrote: Warning: the following post contains a contiguous slice that is a PART of a larger post:
(November 26, 2022 at 6:04 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote: I'm not sure if your proof is valid...
It was valid in discrete math class when I was in University.

You were taught naive set theory, as was I. Little to no introduction to ZFC.
Reply
#12
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:24 pm)Jehanne Wrote: You were taught naive set theory, as was I.  Little to no introduction to ZFC.
How did you get my transcripts (eta: to figure out what I was and was not taught)?
Reply
#13
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:27 pm)rocinantexyz Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 6:24 pm)Jehanne Wrote: You were taught naive set theory, as was I.  Little to no introduction to ZFC.
How did you get my transcripts?

Because, you were taught from Kenneth H. Rosen's book, and no, I am not clairvoyant.
Reply
#14
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:29 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Because, you were taught from Kenneth H. Rosen's book, and no, I am not clairvoyant.
That cover says it was written by: László Lovász, József Pelikán, and Katalin Vesztergombi. Why should I believe you instead of the cover?
Reply
#15
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 7:02 pm)rocinantexyz Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 6:29 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Because, you were taught from Kenneth H. Rosen's book, and no, I am not clairvoyant.
That cover says it was written by: László Lovász, József Pelikán, and Katalin Vesztergombi. Why should I believe you instead of the cover?

Ha! I told you that I was not clairvoyant, and that proves it, doesn't it?!
Reply
#16
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 5:54 pm)LinuxGal Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 5:17 pm)polymath257 Wrote: Step 1: Prove the expression .999.... makes sense.

Otherwise, you could argue as follows:

x=1+2+4+8+16+...

2x=2+4+8+16+32+...

Hence,

x=1+2x

so

-x=1

x=-1

In particular,

1+2+4+8+... <0.

Not so, since x = 0.999... has an upper bound as the decimal expansion continues without limit, but x = 1+2+4... diverges.

And *that* is the point. A discussion about convergence and what, precisely, a decimal expansion means in terms of limits.

Once the definition is given, the equality is automatic. No algebraic manipulations required. Just the fact that 1/10^n --> 0 as n-->infty.
Reply
#17
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 7:12 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Ha!  I told you that I was not clairvoyant, and that proves it, doesn't it?!
Colloquially it might prove something; I'm not sure.
Reply
#18
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:04 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 5:54 pm)LinuxGal Wrote: Not so, since x = 0.999... has an upper bound as the decimal expansion continues without limit, but x = 1+2+4... diverges.

True.  In your case, though, you are performing the same trick - it is just that the additional digit you shifted in is an infinitesimal instead of a large value.

I'm not sure if your proof is valid, but of course one can get as close to correct as you like.

The proof is valid *if* you first demonstrate convergence.

But if you know the definition of convergence, the equality is trivial without the algebraic manipulations.
Reply
#19
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 6:24 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 6:21 pm)rocinantexyz Wrote: Warning: the following post contains a contiguous slice that is a  PART of a larger post:
It was valid in discrete math class when I was in University.

You were taught naive set theory, as was I.  Little to no introduction to ZFC.

ZFC vs naive ST isn't so much the issue here as clarity about what an infinite decimal expansion means. Which means being a bit more precise about what it means to be a real number (although, in this case, we are doing convergence in the rationals).
Reply
#20
RE: Question for finitists -- 0.999... = 1?
(November 26, 2022 at 5:54 pm)LinuxGal Wrote:
(November 26, 2022 at 5:17 pm)polymath257 Wrote: Step 1: Prove the expression .999.... makes sense.

Otherwise, you could argue as follows:

x=1+2+4+8+16+...

2x=2+4+8+16+32+...

Hence,

x=1+2x

so

-x=1

x=-1

In particular,

1+2+4+8+... <0.

Not so, since x = 0.999... has an upper bound as the decimal expansion continues without limit, but x = 1+2+4... diverges.

But it is a perfectly good proof in the 2-adics, where the sum 1+2+4+... does, in fact, converge to -1.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Mathematicians who are finitists. Jehanne 99 15777 July 11, 2019 at 1:53 pm
Last Post: A Toy Windmill
  Maths proves 1=0.999.. thus ends in self contradiction shakuntala 11 6474 December 21, 2014 at 3:57 pm
Last Post: Thumpalumpacus
  If 0.999(etc) = 1, does 1 - 0.999 go to zero? Euler 26 10043 April 30, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  [split] 0.999... equals 1 Rhizomorph13 330 114820 February 20, 2013 at 6:47 am
Last Post: Categories+Sheaves
  If 0.999 (etc.) = 1, does 1 - 0.999 = 0? Child of Stardust 16 11619 March 6, 2012 at 2:12 pm
Last Post: Child of Stardust



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)