Re: .999... stillstillstillstill =/= 1
From: Will Twentyman (wtwentyman_at_read.my.sig)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: Randy Poe: "Re: Cantor K.O.'d -- again!"
- Previous message: rschi611: "Help, math majors! - Is it possible to solve for this variable?"
- In reply to: S. Enterprize Company: "Re: .999... stillstillstillstill =/= 1"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: .999... stillstillstillstill =/= 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:11:30 -0500
S. Enterprize Company wrote:
>>S. Enterprize Company wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>S. Enterprize Company wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I won the debate because I believe in God.
>>>>>
>>>>>I started this debate against an atheist 10 years ago. And I finally won.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I also believe in God. You are wrong. I
>>>
>>> I like the part where you are bold enough to say that you beleive in God
>>>among people that reject God and religion. I think even Einstein believed
>>
>>in
>>
>>>God, but in a different universal perspective.
>>
>>If you want more detail, Christian with a preference for the Southern
>>Baptist denomination.
>>
>>
>>> I do however believe I am not
>>>wrong about .999... and 1. First of all, for a number to be rational, you
>>
>>have
>>
>>>to show it as a fraction between to integers. I think you are claiming
>>
>>.999...
>>
>>>is rational. But,
>>>
>>>9999999...->oo
>>>----------------------------- =
>>>10000000...->oo
>>
>>1/9 = .1111111111111...
>>9(1/9) = 9* .1111111111111....
>>9/9 = 9*.11111111...
>>1 = .9999999999...
>>
>>
>>>This can't be expressed as a fraction betwen two integers. 9999... and
>>>100000... diverges.
>>
>>They also aren't integers.
>
>
> Well, you can't say .999... is rational.
Sure I can. A rational number is a number with a repeating or
terminating decimal. 0.999... is clearly a repeating decimal, and
therefor rational.
>>> By your belief only, not mine.
>>
>>I was more interested in your claim that belief in God somehow made you
>>right. That is not enough.
>
> When I say God, I say a being that has a higher state of intelligence and
> beingness, as compared to man. Like for example, man is trying to figure out
> what is already here in complexity levels of the universe with a probability,
I'll settle for the omniscient God.
-- Will Twentyman email: wtwentyman at copper dot net
- Next message: Randy Poe: "Re: Cantor K.O.'d -- again!"
- Previous message: rschi611: "Help, math majors! - Is it possible to solve for this variable?"
- In reply to: S. Enterprize Company: "Re: .999... stillstillstillstill =/= 1"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: .999... stillstillstillstill =/= 1"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|