Matter /CAN/ be created!

[thethird0611]

I love this part of the wiki on .999_

"William Byers argues that a student who agrees that 0.999... = 1 because of the above proofs, but hasn't resolved the ambiguity, doesn't really understand the equation.[3] Fred Richman argues that the first argument "gets its force from the fact that most people have been indoctrinated to accept the first equation without thinking".[4]"

...Which is about the equation in the OP and the fraction 'answer'. Haha. I felt smart when I still argued in my head about it... then I felt dumb when I started reading more.

 

[lacktheknack]

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-innocent-sounding-topics-that-are-guaranteed-flame-wars/

Number 4 is going to happen again. You KNOW it will.

OT: 0.99999_ is functionally one.

It breaks reality if it isn't.

Honestly? My complaint is now solely directed at your choice of the word "functionally", because, while you probably understand the concept, the people who don't (and refuse to understand it) are going to look at that and say "Oh, they're functionally the same, but not the same."

So I guess that was a self-fulfilling prophecy. XD

0.999_ and 1 are two ways of writing the same number. If I add 0.999_ + 0.999_ I expect the answer to be either 2 or 1.999_, both of which are also the same number.

I was trying to distance myself from the inevitable flame-war, but oh well.

Yeah, I retract my wording. 0.999... = 1.

COME AT ME BRO

 

[balanovich]

Alright, many of you have probably seen this before, but for those of you who haven't: get ready for some mathematical magic as I show you an old trick I learned back in highschool to algerbraeicly (spelling) prove that 0.999repeating actually = 1 by itself.

Start with x = 0.999rep

x = 0.999rep

Multiply both sides of the equation by 10

10x = 9.999rep

Subtract x from both sides.

9x = 9 (10x - x = 9x, 9.999rep - x (which was originally stated as = 0.999rep) = 9)

Divide both sides by 9

x = 1

You can also do this with fractions and logic.

1/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.333rep

2/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.666rep

3/3 as a fraction SHOULD equal 0.999rep....but as a fraction, having three thirds of something means you've got the whole thing, which equates to 1.



(on a side not...the Captcha required to post this contained the word "deleted" spelled backwards and upsidedown...what in god's name am I supposed to do there? (cycled through it) )

I hope you don't feel smart about saying what you just said... because it doesn't make you so. i bet you smoked weed an are in awe before the conflict with real numbers and irrational numbers.... "woow infinity stuff is awesome! I bet I can get people to think I'm smart." And I'm just flabbergasted (see, I toot can get people to think i'm smart.) by the way you failed to mention anything relevant to your title in your post!

 

[TriGGeR_HaPPy]

Oh god, this thread again. It's such an easy way to get a hundred pages of back and forth between those who understand complicated math and those who don't. I refuse to get sucked into another debate about this. It simply never ends.

Yes, .999... is exactly equal to 1. No, it does not involve rounding. They are exactly the same number. No, I'm not going to spend time explaining all of the different proofs and ideas about infinities to people. Search for one of the other threads about this if you really care. Every point I could make has been repeated over and over again in them.

Also, to the OP: If you really wanted to get lots of views, you could have just made the title "FREE TITTIES INSIDE CLICK NAO!!1". It would have had about the same level of relevance to the content of the thread.

This. Just this.
I mean, this thread has been repeated so many times, and as someone who's taken university level maths and talked to one of the heads of the maths department when I first found about about this (who talked me through various proofs for this, from the first one in the OP [worded slightly differently], right to using infinite geometric series for it)...

Just *sigh*.

However, what's with the title? Either you really don't know what this shows, or you just used this as an excuse to make a thread which will get lots of views and replies (and going by one of your own replies, yeah, it's the latter).
And hey, judging by the previous versions of this exact thread... You're almost sure to get just that. Sooo... Bravo, I guess.

 

[CAMDAWG]

If you thought that was cool, here's some Astrophysics 101.

There is a gravitational attration between EVERY object. The equation to calculate that attration is:

Fg=G((M1 * M2)/D^2)

Where
Fg= The force of gravity
G= Universal gravity constant (don't worry about it, it's a really small number)
M1 and M2= Mass of object 1 and 2
D= distance

Now that we have that established...
Black holes have such huge masses that not even light can escape it.
You're probably putting two and two together now...
If you look at the equation, for that statement to be true both objects must have a mass.
Light has mass.

EDIT:

Oh yeah, and according to wikianswer matter can be created when gamma rays collide, or something like that.

Except that electromagnetic radiation has no mass. Newton's law of gravitation is at best an approximation. It works for objects on earth, and most planets, but can't handle mercury, let alone a black hole and/or light. For that you need general rel.

the fact that light is affected by gravity does not mean it has mass.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

That doesn't mean matter can be created though. It just means that .999 repeating is the same as 1.

But how can 0.999_ = 1 when 0.999_ is meant to represent a number infinitely close to 1 without actually being 1? Where does the extra 0.(insert infinite line of zeros)1 come from that bumps all the 9s ahead of it to 10s, thus making it 1?

that isnt matter. its multiplication.

 

[Tanakh]

Oh god, this thread again. It's such an easy way to get a hundred pages of back and forth between those who understand complicated math and those who don't. I refuse to get sucked into another debate about this. It simply never ends.

This, though is not complicated math, it's highschool math or Calculus 101 of a math based career depending on how much a nerd you are and how good are your teachers.

Comparatively this is much more advanced math:

The Banach-Tarski paradox comes much closer to "creating matter from nothing", but of course it doesn't apply either since matter consists of discrete particles, not an uncountable continuum.

It uses abstract algebra in topology to give us a way to duplicate anything that is topologicaly equivalent of a ball

Though at it's heart IMO is just a very creative and very funny way to play with the axiom of choice which simply states that "you can grab an object from a non empty bag" but implies stuff like "the real numbers can be numbered using only natural numbers" which is AWESOMESAUCE!

 

[ultimateownage]

All this shows is that maths and decimal points are not an absolutely precise science.
Now can people please stop posting this. It's not new or clever.

 

[Random Fella]

Alright, many of you have probably seen this before, but for those of you who haven't: get ready for some mathematical magic as I show you an old trick I learned back in highschool to algerbraeicly (spelling) prove that 0.999repeating actually = 1 by itself.

Start with x = 0.999rep

x = 0.999rep

Multiply both sides of the equation by 10

10x = 9.999rep

Subtract x from both sides.

9x = 9 (10x - x = 9x, 9.999rep - x (which was originally stated as = 0.999rep) = 9)

Divide both sides by 9

x = 1

You can also do this with fractions and logic.

1/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.333rep

2/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.666rep

3/3 as a fraction SHOULD equal 0.999rep....but as a fraction, having three thirds of something means you've got the whole thing, which equates to 1.



(on a side not...the Captcha required to post this contained the word "deleted" spelled backwards and upsidedown...what in god's name am I supposed to do there? (cycled through it) )

Where you say 1/3 and 2/3 are equal to .333 and .666 You're actually incorrect
You see 1/3 is .3 reoccurring 4, which means, in the end it is 1/3
While .666 is .6 reoccurring 7, which means in the end it is 2/3
Therefore when you add them together it forms 3/3 or 1
As for your first equation, very interesting, maths does have some flaws in itself after all
But you probably found that on some website, these kinds of equations are very common

Edit: Just realized . reoccurring is 1, it's not like .333reoccurring or .666reoccurring
How did I forget that, either way your equation is correct for that reason

 

[Womplord]

Any number trailing with reoccurring 9's is equal to the number above. in the case of 2.9999rep:

x=2.999rep
10x=29.999rep
9x=27
x=27/9
x=3

this works because 0.0...01=0. Because of this fact, 10*.99999...=9.99999.... Otherwise, 10*.99999... wouldn't equal 9.9999999...

That's all the depth I'm going into because I'm sick of explaining this.

Besides, even if there was a problem with mathematics, it wouldn't say anything about the universe because mathematics is a construct based on logic i.e. the laws of the universe, not the other way round.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

2/3 != 6.6 rec
OP fails at maths.
6.67 = 2/3
6.6 rec is slightly less, never reaching 6.67

 

[Thaliur]

That doesn't mean matter can be created though. It just means that .999 repeating is the same as 1.

Actually, matter CAN be created. It has long been known, but has nothing to do with ridiculous mathematics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production

 

[Techno Squidgy]

I'd just like to say, Well played OP. Well played.
However, beyond a flamewar this thread has no discussion value.

 

[some1stolemyusername]

Alright, many of you have probably seen this before, but for those of you who haven't: get ready for some mathematical magic as I show you an old trick I learned back in highschool to algerbraeicly (spelling) prove that 0.999repeating actually = 1 by itself.

Start with x = 0.999rep

x = 0.999rep

blah blah blah

here i was thinking that i could read something new, and all i got was this retarded drivel

 

[Naleh]

Hah. OP thinks he's saying two crazy things, when in fact he's saying two completely true things. (That matter can be created, and that 0.999... = 1.)

 

[Trippy Turtle]

(on a side not...the Captcha required to post this contained the word "deleted" spelled backwards and upsidedown...what in god's name am I supposed to do there? (cycled through it) )

First of all you .99rep x 10= .99(infinite 9's)0 not all 9's.
Second the captcha only ever has one word that you have to type, the other is just random and you can type anything in its place. The real words never have punctuation and are always in the same font.

 

[hatseflats]

Alright, many of you have probably seen this before, but for those of you who haven't: get ready for some mathematical magic as I show you an old trick I learned back in highschool to algerbraeicly (spelling) prove that 0.999repeating actually = 1 by itself.

Start with x = 0.999rep

x = 0.999rep

Multiply both sides of the equation by 10

10x = 9.999rep

Subtract x from both sides.

9x = 9 (10x - x = 9x, 9.999rep - x (which was originally stated as = 0.999rep) = 9)

Divide both sides by 9

x = 1

You can also do this with fractions and logic.

1/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.333rep

2/3 as a fraction is equal to 0.666rep

3/3 as a fraction SHOULD equal 0.999rep....but as a fraction, having three thirds of something means you've got the whole thing, which equates to 1.

I'm not a mathematics student so this is not really my field, but I think this logic is kind of incorrect.
(0.333_ + 0.333_ + 0.333_)= 3*(1/3) = 1. (0.333_ + 0.333_ + 0.333_)^infinity = 1.
But I would presume (0.999_)^infinity != 1.

 

[Captain_Apop]

Newtons flaming laser sword.

 

[kaizen2468]

1/3 does not = .333
2/3 does not = .666
3/3 does not = 1, it simply rounds the infinitely regressing up to give a whole number for convenience.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

No, no it can't this isn't even related to mass/energy conservation at all this is just a fucking dodgy proof of why in Maths 0.99.. recurring is equivalent to 1. At least use one of the fucking good proofs of this concept and not the shitty dodgy one.