Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.


grei
Posts:
98
Registered:
11/27/12


Re: Help with word problems
Posted:
Mar 13, 2013 11:00 AM


Since you don't know enough not to force a totally unrelated post onto someone else's thread, I guess it should not be a surprise that you also know no mathematics > [1 paradox] Why 0.999... is not equal to 1? > > Written in 2012 > > The current mathematic theory tells us, 1>0.9, > 1>0.99, 1>0.999, ..., but at last it says 1=0.999..., > a negation of itself (Proof 0.999... =1: > 1/9=0.111..., 1/9x9=1, 0.111...x9=0.999..., so > 1=0.999...). I have no idea what your "proof" is even saying but it should not purport to be a proof that 0.9999...= 1. That can be done very nicely by noting that 0.9(1+ .1+ .01+ ...)= 0.9((.1)^0+ (.1)^1+ (.1)^2+ ...) is a "geometric sequence" and anyone who has taken an "intermediate algebra" or "precalculus" class should know that the general geometric series, a(1+ r+ r^2+ ...) has sum a/(1 r). With a= .9 and r= .1, that is .9/(1 .1)= .9/.9= 1.
> So it is totally a paradox, name it as > ?1 paradox?. You see this is a mathematic problem at > first, actually it is a philosophic problem. Then we > can resolve it. Because math is a incomplete theory, > only philosophy could be a complete one. Ah, so in addition to not knowing anyh math, you also do not know what "philosophy" is! > The answer > is that 0.999... is not equal to 1. Because of these > reasons: > > 1. The infinite world and finite world. > > We live in one world but made up of two parts: the > infinite part and the finite part. But we develop our > mathematic system based on the finite part, because > we never entered into the infinite part. Your > attention, God is in it. And now you are being blasphemous as well? God is in all of the world, not just the "infinite world" whatever you mean by that.
We deal with "infinite" things, sequence, series, all the time in mathematics. The fact that YOU have never taken a real mathematics course, don't change that. > > 0.999... is a number in the infinite world, but 1 is > a number in the finite world. For example, 1 > represents an apple. But then 0.999...? We don't > know. That is to say, we can't use a number in the > infinite world to plus a number in the finite world. > For example, an apple plus an apple, we say it is > 1+1=2, we get two apples, but if it is an apple plus > a banana, we only can say we get two fruits. The key > problem is we don't know what is 0.999..., we can get > nothing. So we can't say 9+0.999...=9.999... or 10, > etc. No mathematics, no philosophy, just words used incorrectly. > > We can use "infinite world" and "finite world" to > resolve some of zeno's paradox, too. > There was never a problem resolving "Zeno' paradoxes" (there were several I don't know which you mean) they are easily handled by Calculus for example. Apparently you have never taken a Calculus course.
> 2. lim0.999...=1, not 0.999...=1.
Nonsense you cannot take a LIMIT of a single number. > > 3.The indeterminate principle.
Which is WHAT? Something you just made up? > > Because of the indeterminate principle, 1/9 is not > equal to 0.111.... > Since you don't tell us what the "indeterminate principle" is, this is again nonsense.
> For example, cut an apple into nine equal parts, then > every part of it is 1/9. But if you use different > measure tools to measure the volume of every part, it > is indeterminate. You are comparing "apples and oranges". MATHEMATICALLY we can talk about "1/9" of something. PHYSICALLY, you cannot have exactly "1/9". And once you mention "measure tools", you are talking about Physics, not Mathematics
> That is to say, you may find the > volume could not exactly be 0.111..., but it would be > 0.123, 0.1142, or 0.11425, etc. > True, but irrelevant to mathematics.
> Now we end a biggest mathematical crisis. But most > important is this standpoint tells us, our world is > only a sample from a sample space. When you realized > this, and that the current probability theory is > wrong, when you find the Metasamplespace, you would > be able to create a real AIsystem. It will indicate > that there must be one Godsystem in the system, > which is the controller. Look our world, there must > be one God, as for us, only some robots. Maybe we are > in a God's game, WHO KNOWS? All intelligent people since the ancient world has known that mathematics APPROXIMATES the physical world. Mathematics has never pretended to exactly correspond to the physical world.
So essentially what you are telling us here is that you do not know what mathematics, physics, or philosophy ARE! > > More info, three other download points(written in > Chinese): > (1)www.speedyshare.com/DQz9y/AiforSC.rar > (2)localhostr.com/download/3LtuSLb/the%20end%20of%20th > e%20world.rar > (3)bayfiles.com/file/F5tD/B8M4Xh/AiforSC.rar
Since you don't know enough to



