 Extremeskins

# Does 0.9999 repeating 9 equal 1?

## Recommended Posts

question: the area of the function y<x is equal to the area of the function of y<=x. Does that mean that y<x == y<=x?

Area of a function?

edit: Are you talking integral?

##### Share on other sites

is there really 8 pages discussing this? The answer is CLEARLY a "maybe"

##### Share on other sites

is there really 8 pages discussing this? The answer is clearly a "yes"

fify

##### Share on other sites

.999 repeating is a decimal value, which is not an integer. 1 is an integer so they are clearly not the same.

##### Share on other sites

.999 repeating is a decimal value, which is not an integer. 1 is an integer so they are clearly not the same.

Tell me, what is the number between .999... and 1?

##### Share on other sites

In theory, the answer is no. Because there will always be a gap.

In practical application, the answer is yes. Because the gap is infinitely small.

##### Share on other sites

I say they are equal. There's a funner geometric series proof, but I don't have time to post it now, so I'll update later. Here's one though I really like.

x = .9 repeating

10x = 9.9 repeating

10x -x = 9.9 repeating - .9 repeating

9x = 9

x = 1

so 1 = .9 repeating

##### Share on other sites

In theory, the answer is no. Because there will always be a gap.

In practical application, the answer is yes. Because the gap is infinitely small.

In theory the answer is actually yes.

.999... is not a decimal, it's simply another way of expressing 1.

I could show another proof as well.

##### Share on other sites

is there really 8 pages discussing this? The answer is CLEARLY a "maybe"

I figured my post would at least be good for a hijack:

The real question is does 36C, repeating = 36D? Or is 36CC different then 36D?
Useless without pics.
##### Share on other sites

I say they are equal. There's a funner geometric series proof, but I don't have time to post it now, so I'll update later. Here's one though I really like.

x = .9 repeating

10x = 9.9 repeating

10x -x = 9.9 repeating - .9 repeating

9x = 9

x = 1

so 1 = .9 repeating

Damn. That's pretty good. I don't see any fault in it.

##### Share on other sites

In theory the answer is actually yes.

.999... is not a decimal, it's simply another way of expressing 1.

I could show another proof as well.

I stand corrected. ##### Share on other sites

Technically, NO.

.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

does not equal 1

##### Share on other sites

Tell me, what is the number between .999... and 1?

we. live. in. a. continuous. world.

Discrete. measures. are. not. an. accurate. portrayal. of. reality.

##### Share on other sites

Technically, NO.

.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

does not equal 1

Dude, look at the proof above. Find a fault in it.

##### Share on other sites

Dude, look at the proof above. Find a fault in it.
Just found it:

.9*10=9.0 ##### Share on other sites

we. live. in. a. continuous. world.

Discrete. measures. are. not. an. accurate. portrayal. of. reality.

Doesn't change the fact that .999... = 1.

I've seen some arguements that even if you go to a billion 9's in .99999999 (to a billion 9's) that it is not equal to 1. The entire flaw of this is that 1 billion =/= infinity. Btw this wasn't to you poker.

##### Share on other sites

Just found it:

.9*10=9.0 There is no .9 in the proof. It's a repeating .9

##### Share on other sites

lets say you start off at point 0. and every step you take you get half way closer to point 1. YOU WILL NEVER REACH POINT ONE!!!! EVER. But the difference between the two will be so infinitesimal that we just say that you arrive at point one.

Here is what you would get if you were to run a program that would calculate this.

x=0.0

x=0.5

x=0.75

x=0.875

x=0.9375

x=0.96875

x=0.984375

x=0.9921875

x=0.99609375

x=0.998046875

x=0.9990234375

x=0.99951171875

x=0.999755859375

x=0.9998779296875

x=0.99993896484375

x=0.999969482421875

x=0.9999847412109375

x=0.9999923706054688

x=0.9999961853027344

x=0.9999980926513672

x=0.9999990463256836

x=0.9999995231628418

x=0.9999997615814209

x=0.9999998807907104

x=0.9999999403953552

x=0.9999999701976776

x=0.9999999850988388

x=0.9999999925494194

x=0.9999999962747097

x=0.9999999981373549

x=0.9999999990686774

x=0.9999999995343387

x=0.9999999997671694

x=0.9999999998835847

x=0.9999999999417923

x=0.9999999999708962

x=0.9999999999854481

x=0.999999999992724

x=0.999999999996362

x=0.999999999998181

x=0.9999999999990905

x=0.9999999999995453

x=0.9999999999997726

x=0.9999999999998863

x=0.9999999999999432

x=0.9999999999999716

x=0.9999999999999858

x=0.9999999999999929

x=0.9999999999999964

x=0.9999999999999982

x=0.9999999999999991

x=0.9999999999999996

x=0.9999999999999998

x=0.9999999999999999

##### Share on other sites

we. live. in. a. continuous. world.

Discrete. measures. are. not. an. accurate. portrayal. of. reality.

If. there. is. no. number. between. them. comma. then. they. are. the. same. number. period. ##### Share on other sites

I say they are equal. There's a funner geometric series proof, but I don't have time to post it now, so I'll update later. Here's one though I really like.

x = .9 repeating

10x = 9.9 repeating

10x -x = 9.9 repeating - .9 repeating

9x = 9

x = 1

so 1 = .9 repeating

You guys need to look at this. If you can't find a fault in this, then you have to accept it.

I've accepted it.

Edit: Slacky, your computer only goes to 16 places. It would have to go to an infinite number of places to be of any use in this situation. Therefore, it's useless. ##### Share on other sites

This is worse than the political threads. :doh:

##### Share on other sites

lets say you start off at point 0. and every step you take you get half way closer to point 1. YOU WILL NEVER REACH POINT ONE!!!! EVER. But the difference between the two will be so infinitesimal that we just say that you arrive at point one.

Which has nothing to do with the question.

The proof presented is a valid mathematical proof. It is 100%, absolutely, without question, proven.

All of these "well, no matter how many 9's you have" thought exercises are nothing more than changing the question.

Because no matter how many 9's you have, it won't be an infinite number of 9's.

And the problem specified an infinite number.

##### Share on other sites

This is worse than the political threads. :doh:

Not quite.

1) It's conceivable that some people in this thread will change their position. Some may even admit that they were wrong.

2) And it's highly unlikely that there will be another thread, a month from now, in which exactly the same people will post exactly the same "reasoning".

##### Share on other sites

You guys need to look at this. If you can't find a fault in this, then you have to accept it.

I've accepted it.

Slacky, your computer only goes to 16 places. Therefore, it's useless. Find me a computer that goes to 200 or 300 and you will see the same thing. It will never be exactly 1, but will continue to repeat 9s.

##### Share on other sites

Find me a computer that goes to 200 or 300 and you will see the same thing. It will never be exactly 1, but will continue to repeat 9s.
300 places is infinitely short of what you need.

Look at the proof. You can't refuse to accept the truth when it's staring you in the face.