/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12746851

16KiB, 496x286, Infitesimal limits.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

0.999...=/=1

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 20:51:10 2021 No.12746851 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12746912 >>12746934 >>12746973 >>12747012 >>12747228

If we can have $\aleph_{0}$ , why can't we accept that the infinitesimal isn't 0?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:07:42 No.12746912 Report

Quoted By: >>12746923 >>12746934

>>12746851
>Step 6
That's not how base conversions work

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:10:33 No.12746923 Report

Quoted By: >>12746930 >>12747006

>>12746912
Oh really? Tell me, what's $4/10_{5}$ in base 10?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:11:51 No.12746930 Report

Quoted By: >>12746940 >>12746963

>>12746923
0.999...

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:12:48 No.12746934 Report

Quoted By: >>12746998

>>12746851
>>12746912
You have committed a grave mistake.
$ 0.4..._5 \neq 0.8..._{10} \\ Rather:\\ \Sigma_{n\to\infty} 4(5^{-n}) \\Think\ about\ it. \\(0.44)_5 = (4 * 5 ^{-1} + 4 * 5 ^{-2})_{10} = (0.832)_{10} \neq 0.8..._{10} $
I was just writing that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:13:44 No.12746940 Report

Quoted By: >>12746949

>>12746930
You're seriously telling me this many things: IIII divided by this many: IIIII is not 4/5 in base 10, but actually 0.999...?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:15:46 No.12746949 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746940
No, I thought you were talking about 0.444..., since that's in step 6 that I mentioned. Why did you change the subject?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:21:16 No.12746963 Report

Quoted By: >>12746998

>>12746930
Nope,
?n?4/(5^-n) - ?n?9(10^?n)
=
?n?[2^-n x 4 - 9]/(10^(?n))

Since 2^-n x 4 - 9 < 0 if n > 0, the result is negative.
So 4/105 in base 10 is smaller than 0.9999...
Mathematicians sure lack rigor these days!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:24:25 No.12746973 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746851
because that's how the real numbers are defined, and they're defined this way because it reflects what we want and expect of them. we want the derivative to be EXACTLY the slope, we want the integral to be EXACTLY the area, not something "infinitesimally" close to it. the archimedean property and standard definition of limit gives you precisely this. feel free to invent your own algebraic structure though, it's not like anyone's stopping you.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO zolzm.png, 10KiB, 310x159

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:32:38 No.12746998 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746934
>>12746963
base 5 screwing with my head. I should have converted to fractions.
0.44 is 24/25, which is not 0.832.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:35:10 No.12747006 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746923
0.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 21:37:08 No.12747012 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746851
step 6 is wrong, lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 22:33:46 No.12747228 Report

Quoted By:

>>12746851
your whole thing is just a mess. play around with https://www.rapidtables.com/convert/number/base-converter.html for two minutes to find out that everything you wrote is garbage
>4/10 in Z5 is not .444... in Z5
>.444... in Z5 is not .888... in Z10
also, 4/10 in Z5 is more analogous to 9/10 in Z10 than to 9/9. you should have used 4/4 in Z5 and discovered that you're a moron and dividing a non-zero number by itself is always 1

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches