Date: Dec 22, 2013 3:46 PM
Author: JT
Subject: Re: Matheology sqrt(-2):  WM admits to unlistability of 0/1 sequences

Den söndagen den 22:e december 2013 kl. 03:06:48 UTC+1 skrev wpih...@gmail.com:
> On Saturday, December 21, 2013 9:39:07 PM UTC-4, jonas.t...@gmail.com wrote:
>

> > Den söndagen den 22:e december 2013 kl. 02:25:35 UTC+1 skrev jonas.t...@gmail.com:
>
> >
>
> > > Den lördagen den 21:e december 2013 kl. 23:32:57 UTC+1 skrev wpih...@gmail.com:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > On Saturday, December 21, 2013 6:22:05 PM UTC-4, jonas.t...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > You see it is all very simple to be able to claim that 0.999... actually add up to 1. You must be able to prove that there is such x that 10^-x actually equals zero and i do not see how you can.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > You can't because it is never true. Fortunately, you dont't have to. 0.111... is equal to 1. (Hint look at the *limit* of the partial sums. Or look up the definition of infinite sum in a first year Calculus book. It has nothing to do with your imbecilic twaddle about adding up an infinite number of integers.)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > William Hughes
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Oh fuck and i who always thought that 0.111... added up to 1/9 i must have missed something very fundamental. Or you have had a total mental breakdown i don't know...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You see the algorithm i showed actually add up the sum 0.999... infinitly and it also add up the difference 0.000...1 infinitly.
>
>
>
>
>
> Would should have tipped you off to the fact that you were talking nonsense.
>
> Have you found out what an infinite sum actually is
>
>
>

> > And as long there is a nonezero term in the sequense created from the iterated formula used in calculation, 0.999... simply can not equal 1.
>
>
>
> You think that a sequence of nonzero terms cannot have a limit of 0?!?
>
> (Hint: the limit of a sequence need not be an element of the sequence.
>
> If the sequence is strictly increasing or strictly decreasing it cannot be).


You are wasting your time i do know that the algorithm do produce a sequense of 10^-1 to 10^-inf and it will never yield a nonezero term not after infinitly many iterations..... whatever that can be......