Date: Oct 3, 2017 5:39 AM
Author: plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
Subject: So, Newton called it Complete-Quotient; I will do the same Re: reason<br> why 1=.99999....99(10/9) and why 1/3 = .333333......33(1/3), never that<br> nonsense 1=.999.... 1/3 = .3333.....

On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 9:31:44 PM UTC-5, burs...@gmail.com wrote:
> Unfortunately this is nothing new, and was already
> used by Newton. He calls it "compleat Quotient".
>
> See for yourself here:


Burse becomes useful for a change, hard to believe.

Say there Burse, who was the first to call Reals, as Reals


>
> The method of fluxions and infinite series
> https://archive.org/stream/methodoffluxions00newt#page/162/mode/2up
>
> You find on page 162:
>
> 1/29 = 0.03448(8/29)
>
> Then he goes on (multiply by 8):
>
> 8/29 = 0.27584(64/29)
>
> Then he says, he uses "or rather":
>
> 8/29 = 0.27586(6/29)
>
> And guess what, its the same as calculating with
> rational numbers (hence the name "compleat Quotient).
>
> Be sure you can figure it out that this representation
> is the same as rational numbers. So noting to do with
>
> infinite decimal representation.
>
> Am Dienstag, 3. Oktober 2017 04:21:37 UTC+2 schrieb Archimedes Plutonium:

> > Newsgroups: sci.math
> > Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 08:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > Subject: Why is there a difference between fractions 1/3 and .333 repeating
> > multiplied by 3
> > From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
> > Injection-Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 15:32:50 +0000
> >
> >
> > Because you cannot mix fraction with a decimal unless the decimal ends in 0's
> >
> > For example 10 divided by 3 is 10/3 or written as 3+1/3
> >
> > But completely wrong when writing it as 3.333.... Because the dots mean nothing, unless you write it as 3.3333...33(1/3) so you include the carryover at infinity
> >
> > This means that .99999.... is not 1, unless you included the carryover at infinity border as this
> >
> > .99999....99(10/9) which in fact is 1
> >
> > For you divide 10 by 9 carry the 1 leaving behind 0, 1 added to 9 is 10, carryover the 1, leaving behind another 0, finishing off with
> >
> > .9999....99(10/9) = 1.0000.....
> >
> > You see Old Math was too dumb and lazy to define how those dots ......... Interfaces with fractions, too dumb too lazy
> >
> > AP
> >
> > Newsgroups: sci.math
> > Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 19:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> > Subject: the reason why 1=.99999....99(10/9) and why 1/3 = .333333......33(1/3)
> > From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
> > Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 02:10:39 +0000
> >
> > the reason why 1=.99999....99(10/9) and why 1/3 = .333333......33(1/3)
> >
> > On Monday, October 2, 2017 at 10:33:05 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

> > > Because you cannot mix fraction with a decimal unless the decimal ends in 0's
> > >
> > > For example 10 divided by 3 is 10/3 or written as 3+1/3
> > >
> > > But completely wrong when writing it as 3.333.... Because the dots mean nothing, unless you write it as 3.3333...33(1/3) so you include the carryover at infinity
> > >
> > > This means that .99999.... is not 1, unless you included the carryover at infinity border as this
> > >
> > > .99999....99(10/9) which in fact is 1
> > >
> > > For you divide 10 by 9 carry the 1 leaving behind 0, 1 added to 9 is 10, carryover the 1, leaving behind another 0, finishing off with
> > >
> > > .9999....99(10/9) = 1.0000.....
> > >
> > > You see Old Math was too dumb and lazy to define how those dots ......... Interfaces with fractions, too dumb too lazy
> > >
> > >

> >
> > Alright, let me expand and expound on the ideas above, of undefined and ignorant dots .............
> >
> > The snobs, and slobs of Old Math who think that 1/3 = .333333..... and that 1 = .999999.....
> >
> > Well, ask those slobs and snobs, ask them to add
> >
> > 0.9999999.....
> > +.9999999.......
> >
> > watch the goon squad try to get rid of this 1.99999.....9998
> >
> > ask the goon squad how they got rid of the "8"
> >
> > But, on the other hand, when you well define the ellipsis, for those series of dots ...... is called Ellipsis
> >
> > If you well define the ellipsis with an infinity border and where you include all REMAINDERS in division.
> > Then you have a correct and proper mathematics.
> >
> > The example that must always be followed in division is the remainder
> >    ________
> > 3| 1000       = 333+1/3
> >
> > We never imagine that the correct final answer is without that fraction 1/3 added on
> >
> > Thus, when we have
> >
> >    ________
> > 3| 1.000...       = .333....(+1/3)
> >
> > for we have a ending fraction of (+1/3)
> >
> > Now, the slobs and snobs never realized how important that (+1/3) was for they boneheadedly did this
> >
> > .3333333333.......... plus .3333333...........  = .666666666........ and thought everything was A-okay
> >
> > But look what the true addition is like:
> >
> > .333333.....33(+1/3) + .333333.....33(+1/3) = .66666666........66(+2/3)
> >
> > You see how unmessy that is, because, well look at this by the boneheads:
> >
> > .99999999..... + .99999999..... = 1.999999......998
> >
> > Whereas true math has
> >
> > .9999999......99(+10/9) + .9999999.....99(+10/9) = 1.999999.....98(+20/9) = 2.00000....(+0)
> >
> > So, you see how clean that all is, rather than what the slobs, snobs and boneheads dish out in their fantasies of math.
> >
> > They are failures, regular failures of math for they refuse to define infinity with a borderline and then they make up this crap that .9999.... is the same as 1, or that .33333.... is the same as 1/3 when they forgot about the remainder.
> >
> > AP