
Re: Proof 0.999... is not equal to one.
Posted:
May 31, 2007 1:10 PM


another wasted item on a matter of using two definitions for the same thing.
habitually, you use the natural number, one or "1," to refer to its "real" counterpart, 1.0000...; the alteration to it's other format, 0.9999..., is just the primary ambiguity of "decimals" as dyscussed by Simon Stevin in the 15th cce, that applies to all endings of "inifite" zeroes or nines (in base ten). (this work of his, revolutionized merchantile.)
in base3, one third is just 0.10000..., and so on.
> 0.999... is a representation of a real number, in the same way that 1 > is a representation of a real number (which you suggest below).
thus: here is an additional hypothesis, to try to account for the engines' "missing holes" in the Pentagon attack (that maybe Trickier Dick from teh Nixon Admin. wanted to happen; now, he's in charge of invading Sudan, a virtually trademarked latterday Crusade  I have a source for that; see if you can find one, and try not to googoltood (tm) it, in one way or an other way):
the turbines have enormous angular momentum, which is suddenly sucking at reduced relative airspeed, while being completely released from the wings  with a giant, precessional twist of some sort  which would have *then* dysintegrated with the fuel in them; now, do some envelope scribbling on the subject of massive titaniumalloy "tops." [NB: I take it that the turbines spin in opposite directions; if that is so, it was never covered in my A&P class!]
of course, most of the objections to the idea that a 757 would do this, evaporate in the comparison of the bunkerlike building with the rather lightwieght steel towers. then, WTC7 was teh result of secondary damages to the whole site (the subway etc.).
thus: according to _17 Essays on the Fermat Numbers_ from the SMC, Fermat retracted this conjecture in a letter to Frenecle (sp.?).
> false. Fermat numbers are of the form 2^2^n+1 and the
thus: in Sudan, Iran and possibly all other once and future British quagmires.... Belize, Canada, Trinidad AND Tobago; when we get there, be sure to ask if it's more than one country, and did we miss Trinidad andOR Tobago?
>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/05/01/pentagon_study_says_oil_reliance_strains_military?mode=PF
thus: look, up in the sky  it's Googoltude (TM) ?!? http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf
n~nerfman~n!

