On May 31, 10:30 am, mathed...@hotmail.com.CUT wrote: > On 30 May 2007 23:16:51 -0700, chaja...@mail.com wrote: > > > > >I have written a proof that 0.999... cannot be equal to one in the > >system of real numbers. > > >While at the end of it all you may not fully agree with my proof, much > >I as have never seen a proof asserting they were equal that I was able > >to consider valid, I'm sure you will agree that the > >ideas I present are not a simply rehashing of basic objections of > >others before me. > > >It is available in several formats: > >http://www17.brinkster.com/chajadan/Math/Proofs/Proof1.doc > >http://www17.brinkster.com/chajadan/Math/Proofs/Proof1.odt > >http://www17.brinkster.com/chajadan/Math/Proofs/Proof1.txt > > >--Charles J. Daniels > >chaja...@mail.com > > You have no idea what you're talking about!
The pot is calling the kettle black.
> For those who now what it means, o.999... = 1 is a > trivial fsct and easy to prove! > 0.999... is NOT a real number. It is a symbol that represents an > infinite series.
Using standard definitions, 0.999... does not represent an infinite series, it is a symbol that represents a real number. One way to define which real number is to use the sum of an infinite series, but there are other, equivalent ways (e.g. the real number represented by the equivalence class of Cauchy sequences to which (0.9,0.99,0.999, ...) belongs). You can use the concepts of limit and convergence but you do not need them.
