7777777 and .999... == 1

Regarding this infernal, interminable thread.

Contrary, perhaps, to the title, this is not a pitting of Mr. 7777777, as mere forces of nature are without reason, wholly idiotic and innocent, and therefore above reproach. You’d with as much consequence chastise a thunderstorm for drowning your azaleas. No, friends, this is a pitting of the rest of you. You know who you are.

Having maintained a studied but aloof interest in the progress of the aforementioned thread, I have occasionally had to resist an impulse to add my own voice to the well-meaning chorus of explanations, expositions, and pedagogical discursions that 7777777’s religious fervor seems to demand.

I understand the temptation, believe me. Man is always loath to let a raincloud have the last word. I myself once spent a pleasant afternoon explaining the proof of Burnside’s lemma to a ladybug, which elementary result of group theory it stubbornly defied. Regrettably, it flew away just as I was demonstrating the fallacy of one of its counter-rebuttals. I felt cheated, and naturally woeful that my efforts had not reduced the amount of ignorance in the world by even one iota.

I still occasionally slip into error, but I have learned my lesson sufficiently to be capable of recognizing the fault which several of our esteemed colleagues are, alas! indulging.

That 0.9̅ is another notation for 1 is a simple and obvious fact; a systemic failure to understand any of the dozens of accessible, correct, and concise proofs of this fact can only be explained by a full-stack, no-holds-barred, aggressive and wilful discomprehension of not just the mere concept of notation, but every tenet foundational to formalism of any kind. Such a mind should be consigned to a cell in Broadmoor, or made the chair of a Liberal Arts college, but should on no account be argued with.

I pray, with little hope, for an end to the madness.

Wot?

Ok I looked at a couple of his posts and jah he’s a nutbar.

It’s up top. Fighting ignorance and all that jazz.

Also, numberz iz hard.

0.777777… ≠ 1

All is happening as was prophesied.
<evil chortle, mad laugh, finger twiddle>

I feel dumb a lot but nothing makes me feel dumber faster than a math thread.

Try explaining Sideburn’s bug to a lemming!

I’m not going to check that monster of a thread to find out, but has anyone tried this explanation?

“If 0.999 (rec) really was smaller than 1, you should be able to think of a number that’s between them. If there isn’t one, you have to conclude that they’re the same. That is to say, they’re just two different ways of representing the same value.”

I’ve met people who’ve just refused to grasp this fact, but that explanation always seems to work.

Repeatedly.

“Well, there’s this really tiny but non-zero number between 1 and 0.999… This number is like 0 but isn’t really 0”

Most STEM majors eventually get to the point they mistrust their own intuition and accept that they themselves might not be smart/educated enough to understand an unintuitive result.

And then you’ve got the jackasses whose common sense can’t possibly wrong.

But then you’ve also got the kids who are transitioning between the two, and you don’t want to lose them to the forces of darkness and underwater basket weaving.

1 - 0.999… = 0.0…0001

Unless I misunderstand, you can’t do that because you never get to the one. Just as the .999 extends infinitely, so do the 0s. All that shows is that 0.00000000… is another way of writing 0.

1/9 * 9 = .999… = 9/9 = 1

I wish I was more surprised by this. I mean, math isn’t like most other fields of science. There is no uncertainty. There are postulates and proofs. The sole uncertainty comes in at the edges, and there we’re often able to prove that certain problems have no solution! But this is… this is not hard. There are countless proofs for this, and this guy is such a retard. I’m honestly just in that thread to look smart, because something has to make up for my abysmal failure this semester. :confused:

Ah, but it is if you are using base 8.

I was going to point out to our friend that a rational fraction can have a terminating representation in one base and a non-terminating one in another base (in fact I think that must be the case, but I am not in the mood to argue it). However, I wasn’t sure whether it would be relevant to his argument (since his argument is rather incomprehensable).

One third in base three is 0.1. So, still using base 3, 0.1+0.1+0.1 is 1.0. No possible argument to the contrary or appeal to infinitesimals there. Similarly one tenth is a non-terminating fraction when expressed in base 2.

A noble and correct thought, but considering that he does not even understand the abstract idea of notation, one that would almost certainly just confuse him more. And when he gets confused, he feels he has to return the favor by making up more blithering nonsense. :stuck_out_tongue:

In another thread on the subject, it was agreed that one could re-define the number system to permit this. A typical number would be of the form a + bm – where “m” is an arbitrarily defined infinitesimal. So there really could be a non-zero digit way, way, way the smack out to the right in the decimal expansion.

However…this would eliminate such properties as closure under multiplication, or the distributive property.

So…if you really must come up with a whole new system of arithmetic, you can. It’s completely valid. It lets the people who are desperate to believe that .999… <> 1.0 have their way.

It just ruins arithmetic in a whole lot of other ways.

Meanwhile, .77777… = 7/9.

In base b, the rational number p/q (with p, q relatively prime) has a terminating decimal expansion iff q divides b[SUP]n[/SUP] for some positive n. Equivalently, p/q terminates iff every prime dividing q also divides b. It follows that for any non-integral rational number, there are infinitely many bases in which its decimal expansion is repeating and infinitely many in which it is not.

His argument is ridiculous and incoherent; anything would be irrelevant to it. At the moment, he’s ranting about how two people agree with him and thus he’s right because the Bible and also prophecies. Furthermore, he’s teaching the lessons of God and has truth that is God’s truth, just like Jesus. It’s probably the first time I’ve seen a discussion about arithmetic get hijacked by witnessing, if his rants about ignorant people who can’t understand whatever nonsense he’s talking about actually count as “witnessing.”

He’s not just a complete fucking idiot; he’s also batshit crazy.

I’m just impressed that it’s a discussion about, if not nothing, something that is infinitely small. THAT takes dedication.

Yowza. I knew he was starting to get gradually nuttier, but I didn’t think he’d actually take the nosedive into outright, literal Messiah complex. And to think that at first he just seemed like a fairly ordinary person with a bit of ignorance, a bit of curiosity, and a large lump of bad grammar.

Well, yes. But 0.0…0001 = 0, as there is no number between it and 0.