Go to Post Playing fields outdoors in the snow and the only field faults were when you ran out of gas!...ahh the old days - ExTexan [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Other > Math and Science
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 01:53
dk5sm5luigi's Avatar
dk5sm5luigi dk5sm5luigi is offline
Registered User
AKA: Nick Galotti
FRC #1735 (Green Reapers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Worcester
Posts: 293
dk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud ofdk5sm5luigi has much to be proud of
Send a message via AIM to dk5sm5luigi
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b
major probelm: you cannot take the ln of a negative number. therefore, the term ln e^(i * pi) cannot exist.
you just don't know how to deal with imaginary numbers. plus if you look at how i display it i pull the e and i out of it making it ln e which is a positive number. Although there are other flaws. you just have to find them.
__________________
Team 1735 Green Reapers: 2005-Present
Team 190 Gompei: 2001-2005
Team 155 Technonuts: 1997-2001
http://www.first-a-holics.com/
http://www.findrobotparts.com/

Last edited by dk5sm5luigi : 26-01-2004 at 01:58.
Reply With Quote
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 02:47
Jay Lundy Jay Lundy is offline
Programmer/Driver 2001-2004
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 320
Jay Lundy is a name known to allJay Lundy is a name known to allJay Lundy is a name known to allJay Lundy is a name known to allJay Lundy is a name known to allJay Lundy is a name known to all
Re: .999~ = 1

A little while ago I wrote a long calculus proof about why .999... = 1 but I can't find it.

But it's true. Think about it this way:

1 - .999... = 1/inf

1/inf = 0 (by definition).

For the "proof" that 3 = 1, my trusty TI-89 says that ln[e^(3*i*pi}] = i*pi not 3*i*pi. I don't know much about imaginary numbers, so don't ask me why.

For the "proof" that 2=1, that's easy. At one point you divide both sides by (a-b). a = b therefore a-b = 0 and you are dividing by 0.
Reply With Quote
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 11:16
Kris Verdeyen's Avatar
Kris Verdeyen Kris Verdeyen is offline
LSR Emcee/Alamo Game Announcer
FRC #0118 (Robonauts)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 699
Kris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond repute
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b
major probelm: you cannot take the ln of a negative number. therefore, the term ln e^(i * pi) cannot exist. i have another one of those phony proofs, its kinda fun:

let a=1, b=1
a = a
a^2 = ab
a^2 - b^2 = ab - b^2
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)
a + b = b
1 + 1 = 1

have fun =D
Although, I think it would actually go like this:
let a=1, b=1
a = a
a^2 = ab
a^2 - b^2 = ab - b^2
(a + b)(a - b) = b(a - b)

This line gives you a division by zero error when you divide both sides by (a-b), because a-b = 0.

Also, e^i*pi is a perfectly valid expression that doesn't take the ln of a negative number. e^i*pi = cos(pi) + i sin(pi) = -1
__________________
...Only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement. -JP Shanley, Joe vs. the Volcano

Last edited by Kris Verdeyen : 26-01-2004 at 11:20.
Reply With Quote
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 11:52
mtrawls's Avatar
mtrawls mtrawls is offline
I am JVN! (John von Neumann)
#0122 (NASA Knights)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hampton, VA
Posts: 295
mtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to mtrawls
Re: .999~ = 1

Don't think .999999999... = 1?

Think about it! Between any two numbers, there must needs be another number. For example, between 1 and 3 there is 2; between .5 and .6 there is .55; you can satisfy yourself if you don't buy it. Anyway, try to find a number between .999999... and 1 ... you can't, as they are the same number (just as you probably couldn't find a number between 2 and, well, 2).

Anyway, check out the authority on the matter: Dr. Math
Reply With Quote
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 11:57
kevinw kevinw is offline
Registered User
#0065
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Farmington Hills
Posts: 132
kevinw is a name known to allkevinw is a name known to allkevinw is a name known to allkevinw is a name known to allkevinw is a name known to allkevinw is a name known to all
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Lundy
A little while ago I wrote a long calculus proof about why .999... = 1 but I can't find it.

But it's true. Think about it this way:

1 - .999... = 1/inf

1/inf = 0 (by definition).

For the "proof" that 3 = 1, my trusty TI-89 says that ln[e^(3*i*pi}] = i*pi not 3*i*pi. I don't know much about imaginary numbers, so don't ask me why.

For the "proof" that 2=1, that's easy. At one point you divide both sides by (a-b). a = b therefore a-b = 0 and you are dividing by 0.
This is related to sines and cosines. To say cos(pi) = cos(3*pi) proves that 1=3 would be incorrect.
Reply With Quote
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 13:35
Solace's Avatar
Solace Solace is offline
Head Hurts. Coffee. More. Now!
AKA: Jake
#0571 (Team Paragon)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Windsor, CT
Posts: 569
Solace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Solace
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy_Mc
Not quite

1 = 1

-1 = -1

-1/1 = -1/1

-1/1 = -1/1(-1/-1)

-1/1 = 1/-1

(-1/1)^.5 = (1/-1)^.5

((-1)^.5) / (1^.5) = (1^.5) / ((-1)^.5)
cross multiply, and you get


Did you forget order of operations?
Exponents first

(1/-1) / (1/1) = (1/1) / (1/-1)

(-1) / (1) = (1) / (-1)

-1 != 1
-1 = -1

Atleast I'm pretty sure that's right...

no. order of operations only matters when you are actually evaluating something. you are not yet evaluating at this point, only at the end.

The reason why this little tidbit of confusion can exist is because the laws governing the use of the subdivision of fractions involving roots do not extend into the realm of imaginary numbers.
__________________
...What is a man,
If the chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep, and tool? A nerd, no more.

2004 UTC New England #2 seed
2004 UTC New England Champions with 716 & 230
2004 Archimedes #2 seed, undeafeated in Qualifiers (for what its worth)


Jake
Team Paragon #571
Reply With Quote
  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 14:51
ahecht's Avatar
ahecht ahecht is offline
'Luzer'
AKA: Zan
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Billerica, MA
Posts: 978
ahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond reputeahecht has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via ICQ to ahecht Send a message via AIM to ahecht Send a message via Yahoo to ahecht
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solace
(-1/1)^.5 = (1/-1)^.5

((-1)^.5) / (1^.5) = (1^.5) / ((-1)^.5)
Actually, if (-1/1)^.5 = (1/-1)^.5, then (+-)((-1)^.5) / (1^.5) = (+-)(1^.5) / ((-1)^.5)

Therefore, the final step of the proof will state (+-)1=(+-)1, which is true.


Here is another interesting one: a proof by induction that everyone who reads Chief Delphi is the same age!

First, a little refresher of proof by induction. In an inductive proof, we prove that statement S(n) is true when n=1, and then prove that if S(n) is true, then S(n + 1) is true. If we prove these two things, we have then proven that S(n) is true for all values of n.

Statement S(n): In any group of n Chief Delphi readers, everyone in that group has the same age.

First I prove that S(1) is true:
  1. In any group that consists of just one Chief Delphi reader, everybody in the group has the same age, because after all there is only one person!
  2. Therefore, S(1) is true.
Next, I prove that if S(n) is true, then S(n + 1) must also be true.
  1. Let G be an arbitrary group of n+1 Chief Delphi readers; we just need to show that every member of G has the same age.
  2. To do this, we just need to show that, if P and Q are any members of G, then they have the same age.
  3. Consider everybody in G except P. These people form a group of n Chief Delphi readers, so they must all have the same age (since we are assuming that, in any group of n Chief Delphi readers, everyone has the same age).
  4. Consider everybody in G except Q. Again, they form a group of n Chief Delphi readers, so they must all have the same age.
  5. Let R be someone else in G other than P or Q.
  6. Since Q and R each belong to the group considered in step 3, they are the same age.
  7. Since P and R each belong to the group considered in step 4, they are the same age.
  8. Since Q and R are the same age, and P and R are the same age, it follows that P and Q are the same age.
  9. We have now seen that, if we consider any two people P and Q in G, they have the same age. It follows that everyone in G has the same age.
The proof is now complete: we have shown that the statement is true for n=1, and we have shown that whenever it is true for n it is also true for n+1, so by induction it is true for all n.
__________________
Zan Hecht

Scorekeeper: '05 Championship DaVinci Field/'10 WPI Regional
Co-Founder: WPI-EBOT Educational Robotics Program
Alumnus: WPI/Mass Academy Team #190
Alumnus (and founder): Oakwood Robotics Team #992


"Life is an odd numbered problem the answer isn't in the back of the book." — Anonymous WPI Student

Last edited by ahecht : 26-01-2004 at 15:03.
Reply With Quote
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 15:23
Ameya's Avatar
Ameya Ameya is offline
Freelance Goon
FRC #0293 (SPIKE Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Pennington, NJ
Posts: 67
Ameya is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Ameya Send a message via AIM to Ameya
Re: .999~ = 1

Also, the infinite decimal expansion 0.99999... is the geometric series .9+.09+.009+...

a = 0.9 (the first term)
r = 0.1 (the constant multiple).

Geometric series with |r|<1 converge to a/(1-r). In this case, that's 0.9 / (1-0.1) = 0.9/0.9 = 1

So 0.9999... = 1.
__________________
Ameya Agaskar
Team 293 alumnus
Reply With Quote
  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2004, 16:08
Jeremy_Mc's Avatar
Jeremy_Mc Jeremy_Mc is offline
GitHubber
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 496
Jeremy_Mc will become famous soon enoughJeremy_Mc will become famous soon enough
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grommit
Mathematicians would agree that .999... and 1 represent the same real number. In fact, from my real analysis book, "Elementary Analysis" by Kenneth Ross, it says:
[short proof, similar to above]
"Thus 0.9999... and 1.0000... are different decimal expansions that represent the same real number!"
Later on the book proves that the only case where this can occur is when the two expansions for the same real number end in an infinite series of nines and infinite series of zeros.
Real number...yes.

That's because you can't have decimals and fractions in a real number...so I guess you could say yes, .999~ and 1 are the same real number.

[Edit: Wait...just kidding. Im dumb.]
__________________
GitHub - Collaborate on code, documentation, etc. - http://github.com
Reply With Quote
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-01-2004, 23:18
pryoplasm's Avatar
pryoplasm pryoplasm is offline
Pit Crew/Electrical
AKA: Russ
#0069
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Quincy, Ma
Posts: 73
pryoplasm can only hope to improve
Re: .999~ = 1

well, for those who still have doubts about the difference between the number. first of all, because i am too lazy to find the alt + some odd number to find a 9 with a repeating symbol above it, yes i did use .999~ to represent an infinite amount of 9's, so that the only numerical difference between .999~ and 1 is .000~1, which is an infinitesimly small amount, and therefore in math, ignored.

also when i said infinitesimly, if i made up a word there, sorry, but it sounds good....
Reply With Quote
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-01-2004, 23:52
Adam Y.'s Avatar
Adam Y. Adam Y. is offline
Adam Y.
no team (?????)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,979
Adam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to beholdAdam Y. is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Adam Y.
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
well, for those who still have doubts about the difference between the number. first of all, because i am too lazy to find the alt + some odd number to find a 9 with a repeating symbol above it, yes i did use .999~ to represent an infinite amount of 9's, so that the only numerical difference between .999~ and 1 is .000~1, which is an infinitesimly small amount, and therefore in math, ignored.
That works for all sciences. I forgot the method of rounding but it really would not matter what decimal place .999999999999 is rounded to since it rounds directly up to 1.
__________________
If either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. -Mill
Reply With Quote
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2004, 01:45
Greg Ross's Avatar
Greg Ross Greg Ross is offline
Grammar Curmudgeon
AKA: gwross
FRC #0330 (Beach 'Bots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Posts: 2,245
Greg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Greg Ross Send a message via Yahoo to Greg Ross
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by pryoplasm
also when i said infinitesimly, if i made up a word there, sorry, but it sounds good....
It's it's not a new word, but it's spelled infinitesimally.
__________________
Greg Ross (The Grammar Curmudgeon formerly known as gwross)
S/W Engineer, Team 330, the Beach 'Bots
<--The Grammar Curmudgeon loves this cartoon.
“Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!" Hunter S. Thompson
"Playing a practical joke means doing something mean and calling it funny." Me
Reply With Quote
  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2004, 08:28
trev2023's Avatar
trev2023 trev2023 is offline
Registered User
None #1236 (Phoenix Rising)
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Danville, Virginia
Posts: 35
trev2023 will become famous soon enough
Send a message via ICQ to trev2023 Send a message via AIM to trev2023 Send a message via MSN to trev2023 Send a message via Yahoo to trev2023
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by pryoplasm
ok, bear in mind you need to comprehend at least 8th grade math to understnd this(stolen from LUE on gamefaqs.com quite some time ago, but good for conversation)


1/3 =.333~
2/3 =.666~
.333~+.666~=.999~
1/3 + 2/3 = 1
.999~=1

or

.999~=1
x = .999
10x= 9.999~
9x = 9
x=1
1=.999~

discuss.
Theres a flaw in your theory. If x=.999, then 10x is gonna equal 9.99, not 9.999~. that would mean that 9x=8.991, and x would equal .999, which makes sense, since this is what you started out with as x.
Reply With Quote
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2004, 08:51
mtrawls's Avatar
mtrawls mtrawls is offline
I am JVN! (John von Neumann)
#0122 (NASA Knights)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Hampton, VA
Posts: 295
mtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to beholdmtrawls is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to mtrawls
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by trev2023
Theres a flaw in your theory. If x=.999, then 10x is gonna equal 9.99, not 9.999~. that would mean that 9x=8.991, and x would equal .999, which makes sense, since this is what you started out with as x.
Ah, but x != .999, rather x = .999 ... (repeating for ever and ever, or as long as you'd like to count). Refer to my previous post, and click on the link (it explains things to skeptics quite well, I think). And it's not a "theory" -- it's actually quite established that .9 repeating is the same number as 1.
Reply With Quote
  #30   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-01-2004, 15:00
Greg Ross's Avatar
Greg Ross Greg Ross is offline
Grammar Curmudgeon
AKA: gwross
FRC #0330 (Beach 'Bots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Posts: 2,245
Greg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Ross has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Greg Ross Send a message via Yahoo to Greg Ross
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by trev2023
Theres a flaw in your theory. If x=.999, then 10x is gonna equal 9.99, not 9.999~. that would mean that 9x=8.991, and x would equal .999, which makes sense, since this is what you started out with as x.
I guess Pyro could have documented his steps a little more clearly.

His 9x=9 didn't come from multiplying 9*.999.... (Which would indeed give you 8.999...1.) Rather it came from subtracting the two equations above it.

[Actually, if you were to multiply out 9*.999..., since the .999... never ends, the 8.999...1 would be 8.999.... You'd never get to the 1. According to the postulate, this would be equal to 9, but we can't rely on that, since it's the postulate that we're trying to prove.]
__________________
Greg Ross (The Grammar Curmudgeon formerly known as gwross)
S/W Engineer, Team 330, the Beach 'Bots
<--The Grammar Curmudgeon loves this cartoon.
“Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!" Hunter S. Thompson
"Playing a practical joke means doing something mean and calling it funny." Me

Last edited by Greg Ross : 29-01-2004 at 00:40. Reason: Added an afterthought.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:49.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi