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



Re: It is a very bad idea and nothing less than stupid to define 1/3 = 0.333...
Posted:
Oct 5, 2017 12:15 PM


On 10/5/2017 9:59 AM, bursejan@gmail.com wrote:
> Doesn't make any sense, since it is a sequence > and not a number. But obviously the decimal > notation 0.999... refers to a number. So its > simply lim n>oo (1(1/10)^n), from the > > mathematical notational convention, that the > ... in the above context includes the limit.
I am not familiar with a convention that includes the limit as part of the sequence. That sounds like a bad idea to me, not least because we can't assume that a particular sequence has a limit.
In this discussion, no matter what you may be familiar with, it's important to keep clear which we're talking about at any point: the sequence or the limit of the sequence.
Anyway, what netzwelter wrote out is what I asked for, that sequence defined without '...' My hope is that he does not take your advice.
> Am Donnerstag, 5. Oktober 2017 15:50:38 UTC+2 > schrieb netzweltler: >>> I mean a '...' at the end of the description. >>> When one writes >>> 0.9, 0.99, 0.999, ... >>> one puts '...' at the end of _that_ but what does it mean? >> >> (1(1/10)^n)n?N



