byron
Posts:
885
Registered:
3/3/09


Re: 0.9999... = 1 that means mathematics ends in contradiction
Posted:
Mar 12, 2013 9:39 PM


On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 12:06:53 PM UTC+11, 1treePetrifiedForestLane wrote: > as Stevin explained, > > it's just a simple ambiguity, > > that is "taken care of with an equals sign." > > > > 1.0000... means, "one dot endless placeholders > > for powers of tenth;" you have got to visualize every "last" one > > of them. > > > > > yesw but .9999... is a nonfinite number > > > and 1.0000.. is a finite number > > > > thus: > > he just never learned fractions; that simple, is > > that he cannot possibly "analyze the dimensionality > > of a problem," if he cannot ... cancel units in a simple fraction. > > > > also, this equation looks as if it has a "function of m," > > although I don't recall, what he really thinks he means. > > > > the speed of light is in (say) meters per second; > > the growth of the wavefront is in skware meters per skware seconds, > > but that is two very differnt kind of "skwares" ... really, > > the Pythagorean theorem has *nothing* to do with skwares! > > > > > > KE = a/g (m) + v/32.174 (m). > > > > And the correct equation for the acceleration > > > > due to gravity is g = 32.174 feet per second EACH second, > > > > thus: > > because you refuse to consider "atoms in free space," I had > > to stop rolling aorund on the floor to consider, Why the ****? > > > > thus: > > the elements (and isotopes) cannot be understood > > without reference to the regular hedra; > > see the Moon model, > > http://21stcenturysciencetech.com > > > > > # I'd claim that there is only one, authentic, presentation > > > of the elements, and that is the "short" version, > > > where Groups have A and B, plus the > > > Lanthanides and Actinides restored to the body > > > of the table. Messy, but > > > accurate  and reflecting the Evolution of the Elements. > > > > thus: > > the orbits of the electrons in the flyaway astronaut cannot > > go faster than the speed of light propogation (Snell's law > > of refraction, taken to extremus) "in the forward direction." > > > > what is so difficult?... of course, > > the orbits are not in general aligned with or against > > the direction of travel ... oh, no  trigonometry!
you say "as Stevin explained,"
it very simple really as the proof shows
a nonfinite number.9999...= a finite number 1.0000 thus maths ends in contradition fact is .9999... is a nonfinite number and 1.0000.. is a finite number

