The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Mathematics proven inconsistent an integer= a non-integer
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Mathematics proven inconsistent an integer= a non-integer

  • 22 Replies
  • 6810 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 3743
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 531 times
Re: Mathematics proven inconsistent an integer= a non-integer
« Reply #20 on: 23/01/2019 22:01:13 »
0.9999.... is equal to exactly 1.

There are many ways of proving this using generally accepted and previously established methods, either algebraically or using limits. If you want to reinvent mathematics such that this is not the case, you may well find that your version of math gives paradoxical or nonsensical answers. (there are still some holes in our system, but overall it works pretty well, and this is not one of those holes--if you really want to tug at the very fiber of our system, look at the "axiom of choice" and the "continuum hypothesis.")

I would urge caution for those who have difficulty interpreting numbers that cannot be expressed perfectly decimal notation. Beware of irrational numbers (which cannot be expressed perfectly as a ratio of any two whole numbers), and especially of transcendental numbers (which cannot be expressed perfectly as a polynomial combination of rational numbers). These numbers are all very much real, easily defined (most of 'em), useful (some of 'em), and together vastly outnumber the "well-behaved" numbers...
Logged
 



guest4091

  • Guest
Re: Mathematics proven inconsistent an integer= a non-integer
« Reply #21 on: 24/01/2019 18:01:22 »
u =.1 + .01 + .001 +...+1/10^n

10u = 1 + u – 1/10^n

9u = 1  – 1/10^n

u = 1/9 – (1/10^n)/9

An 'infinite' sequence is never complete since 'infinity' is not a number.
Why did the early mathematicians define a 'limit' instead of declaring an equality?
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    10.5%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: Mathematics proven inconsistent an integer= a non-integer
« Reply #22 on: 24/01/2019 20:02:09 »
Quote from: phyti on 24/01/2019 18:01:22
An 'infinite' sequence is never complete
Then 0.9999.... does not exist and we don't need to worry about it.
So, you can stop now.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.223 seconds with 29 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.