The Veauty Of Mathematicks!

[[UvH]Hitman]

Actually, what Peter said was, believe it or not, correct.
        .                          __   
1=0.99 just as much as 0.13 = 13/99
The numbers 1 and 13/99 aren't infinite, but the others are.

Its just limiting infinite numbers.

Nah, maddolis! WRONG!
You all forgot to leave the 9 out. Epic fail madd

its:

x = 0.99999

then are

10x = 9.9999  ( not 9.99999, as you said)

so then:
10x -x = 9.9999 - 0.99999

9x = 8.99991

x = 0.99999



May the fail be with you

[Maddolis]

Hitman link=topic=11321.msg131550#msg131550 date=1217253549]
Nah, maddolis! WRONG!
You all forgot to leave the 9 out. Epic fail madd
its:
x = 0.99999
then are
10x = 9.9999  ( not 9.99999, as you said)
so then:
10x -x = 9.9999 - 0.99999
9x = 8.99991
x = 0.99999

a) I'm not wrong.                                .
b) I didn't say 0.9999 nor 0.99999, its 0.9
Notice the . on top of the 9? That means 0.999999...
AKA 0.99999(continue 9s here infinitely).

Peter's working is correct, as is mine.

[[UvH]Hitman]

okay, did not know how you show infinite numbers

we in germany put an _ obove the 9. 

this:  _
      9.999

[Maddolis]

Hitman link=topic=11321.msg131572#msg131572 date=1217256926]
okay, did not know how you show infinite numbers

we in germany put an _ obove the 9. 

this:   _
      9.999

Same kind of deal, a _ over the number would mean its repeated.
We can also put . over the number if its a single number, but if its 2+ numbers (eg 0.131313 or 54.254254254 etc) then we need the _ over them.

[[UvH]Hitman]

Same kind of deal, a _ over the number would mean its repeated.
We can also put . over the number if its a single number, but if its 2+ numbers (eg 0.131313 or 54.254254254 etc) then we need the _ over them.

Chuck has spoken.

[Sammo]

[SidVicious]

The first post was very clever and cool. It was kinda spoiled by the silly "God" reference though...

IDmad link=topic=11321.msg129931#msg129931 date=1216734781]
pff Peter hax how can x be 0.9999... and 1 at the same time? 

'Cos 0.99999 .... (recurring) IS equal to 1 when we the recursion is infinite... Essentially Peter's post could have been boiled down to

1 = 0.9999... (recurring)

. It illustrates the idea of infinitesimally small decrements, i.e., 1 minus an infinitesimally small number is equal to 0.9999... (recurring). If you subtract an infinitesimally small number from another number it hasn't actually changed and is therefore still equal to the original number...

[Maddolis]

The first post was very clever and cool. It was kinda spoiled by the silly "God" reference though...


'Cos 0.99999 .... (recurring) IS equal to 1 when we the recursion is infinite... Essentially Peter's post could have been boiled down to . It illustrates the idea of infinitesimally small decrements, i.e., 1 minus an infinitesimally small number is equal to 0.9999... (recurring). If you subtract an infinitesimally small number from another number it hasn't actually changed and is therefore still equal to the original number...

Infinitely small LIKE YOUR PENIS!

Oohhhhh below the belt! Over the line!

Cmon, show me what you got Sid!

[SidVicious]

Infinitely small LIKE YOUR PENIS!

Your mom liked it.

[Maddolis]

Your mom liked it.

Yours did too.

Ooohhh! Another, another!