Go to Post I implore you to not spend your mental energy on preparing your argument for the inspectors. We all have better things to be thinking about and working on. - mrnoble [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
  #46   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2004, 19:09
OldDan1168 OldDan1168 is offline
Webmaster, Witty Writer
#1168 (MalvernCTDI Friarbots)
Team Role: Webmaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Malvern, Pennsylvania
Posts: 8
OldDan1168 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: .999~ = 1

Hi guys,
never posted before because i'm afraid i'm not as technically proficient with FIRST robotics as a lot of you, but, if there's one thing i know, it's calculus.

.999~ (.999 recurring or repeating as its commonly known) does in fact equal one. The "Multiply by Ten" Proof is true, but difficult to grasp for the common mind, so suffice to say that this proves it once and for all: (granted someone already did mention this)

A infinite geometric series is a series of numbers where one begins with a set point (the First element) and finds the next point by multiplying the First element by some number X. Then, to find the next number in the sequence, you keep on taking the number you have and multiplying by X (X is called the common ratio, in fact). Odd as it may seem, such infinite series of numbers do in fact add up to definite finite real values. The sum of an infinite geometric series is A / (1 - R) where A is the First element of the series and R is the common ratio. In this case, The series is .9 + .09 + .009 + . 0009 ad infinitum. Thus, the First element "A" is clearly .9 and the Common Ratio "R" is clearly .1 , or One-Tenth. Now, consider: in this case, A / (1 - R) = .9 / (1 - .1) which equals .9/.9 which of course equals 1. Ta da! For those of you who don't believe this geometric series sum rule i am using, there are myriad other ways to show the fact, such as the calculus' Ratio test, etc.

Meanwhile, this is a fascinating discussion, and I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts. Someone mentioned the idea of 0/0. There's a name for it, and I seem to forget exactly what the name is (the name does make sense once you hear it). Anyway it's not 0; 0/0 is equal to INF/INF or 1^INF or 0^0 or any other myriad devilish expressions : it simply does not exist. I think it might be called an infinite discontinuity but that's just a guess. anyhow, there's math for ya!

captain dan
team 1168
www.friarbot.com rocks my world too hard
Reply With Quote
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-02-2004, 19:42
deltacoder1020's Avatar
deltacoder1020 deltacoder1020 is offline
Computer Guy
AKA: Dav
#1020 (The Indiana Prank Monkeys)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Muncie, Indiana
Posts: 340
deltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura aboutdeltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to deltacoder1020
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDan1168
The sum of an infinite geometric series is A / (1 - R) where A is the First element of the series and R is the common ratio.
note - only for R < 1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDan1168
Meanwhile, this is a fascinating discussion, and I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts. Someone mentioned the idea of 0/0. There's a name for it, and I seem to forget exactly what the name is (the name does make sense once you hear it). Anyway it's not 0; 0/0 is equal to INF/INF or 1^INF or 0^0 or any other myriad devilish expressions : it simply does not exist. I think it might be called an infinite discontinuity but that's just a guess.
One of the best known applications of this is L'Hopital's rule, which is used for finding the integrals of certain functions that can be transformed into something that resembles one of those patterns - 0/0, inf/inf, inf-inf, 1^inf, 0^0, et cetera.
__________________
Team 1020, the Indiana Prank Monkeys (www.team1020.org)
Reply With Quote
  #48   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2004, 02:12
rbayer's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
rbayer rbayer is offline
Blood, Sweat, and Code
no team (Teamless Orphan)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Minnetonka, MN
Posts: 1,087
rbayer is a glorious beacon of lightrbayer is a glorious beacon of lightrbayer is a glorious beacon of lightrbayer is a glorious beacon of lightrbayer is a glorious beacon of light
Send a message via AIM to rbayer
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltacoder1020
One of the best known applications of this is L'Hopital's rule, which is used for finding the integrals of certain functions that can be transformed into something that resembles one of those patterns - 0/0, inf/inf, inf-inf, 1^inf, 0^0, et cetera.

L'Hopital's Rule is actually usually used for computing limits. For example, to compute

lim x/sin(x) as x-->0, we can apply L'Hopitals rule to find that

lim x/sin(x) = lim 1/cos x = 1.
__________________
New C-based RoboEmu2 (code simulator) available at: http://www.robbayer.com/software.php
Reply With Quote
  #49   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2004, 10:09
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 OldDan1168
Meanwhile, this is a fascinating discussion, and I enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts. Someone mentioned the idea of 0/0. There's a name for it, and I seem to forget exactly what the name is (the name does make sense once you hear it). Anyway it's not 0; 0/0 is equal to INF/INF or 1^INF or 0^0 or any other myriad devilish expressions : it simply does not exist. I think it might be called an infinite discontinuity but that's just a guess. anyhow, there's math for ya!
I believe you are looking for "indeterminate form." Check out mathworld
Reply With Quote
  #50   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2004, 11:04
deltacoder1020's Avatar
deltacoder1020 deltacoder1020 is offline
Computer Guy
AKA: Dav
#1020 (The Indiana Prank Monkeys)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Muncie, Indiana
Posts: 340
deltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura aboutdeltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to deltacoder1020
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbayer
L'Hopital's Rule is actually usually used for computing limits. For example, to compute

lim x/sin(x) as x-->0, we can apply L'Hopitals rule to find that

lim x/sin(x) = lim 1/cos x = 1.
also thus used in calculus for finding the limits of infinite integrals (happened to be doing that a couple of days ago in calculus, so I mentioned it in that context).
__________________
Team 1020, the Indiana Prank Monkeys (www.team1020.org)
Reply With Quote
  #51   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-02-2004, 09:55
Denman's Avatar
Denman Denman is offline
Tie Wrap-Not Cable Tie or Zip tie
AKA: Stephen Denman
FRC #0759 (Systemetric)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 817
Denman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud of
Send a message via ICQ to Denman Send a message via AIM to Denman Send a message via MSN to Denman Send a message via Yahoo to Denman
Re: .999~ = 1

a couple of things
Firstly:
i can prove that 1=0


ok, assume its an identity (cant do that on a keyboard but assume the = is an identity sign)
if you say 1=0
if you take 1 from each side
0=-1
multiply by 2
0=-2
add one to both sides
1=-1
Square
1=1
voila
or do it backwards to get it if you like.

also, i can prove mathamatically the first part
1/9 = 0.1111... (recurring)
10/9 = 1.1111... (recurring)
10/9 - 1/9 = 9/9 = 0.9999999999, or 1 as 9/9 is 1 but 9 x 0.11111111111 = 0.9 revcurring. therefore 0.9999.... doesn't exist


its marvalous that e^(pi i )=-1
__________________
I am an ex-member of team 759.
759: regional winners with 522 and 233 NYC (2004)


FIRSTWiki.org - Contribute, learn, inspire.

"Teach the way of the GP and the way of the GP shall teach you" - Me
Reply With Quote
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2004, 11:40
deltacoder1020's Avatar
deltacoder1020 deltacoder1020 is offline
Computer Guy
AKA: Dav
#1020 (The Indiana Prank Monkeys)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Muncie, Indiana
Posts: 340
deltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura aboutdeltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to deltacoder1020
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denman
a couple of things
Firstly:
i can prove that 1=0


ok, assume its an identity (cant do that on a keyboard but assume the = is an identity sign)
if you say 1=0
if you take 1 from each side
0=-1
multiply by 2
0=-2
add one to both sides
1=-1
Square
1=1
voila
or do it backwards to get it if you like.
squaring is not a 1 to 1 operation, thus you cannot do the proof backwards, and thus it is not valid.

x^2 = y^2 --/--> x = y
(x squared = y squared) does not imply (x = y)
__________________
Team 1020, the Indiana Prank Monkeys (www.team1020.org)
Reply With Quote
  #53   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2004, 11:52
ngreen ngreen is offline
Registered User
AKA: Nelson Green
FRC #1108 (Panther Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Paola, KS
Posts: 821
ngreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant future
Re: .999~ = 1

You can't get the square root of 1 equal to -1 so it fails.
Reply With Quote
  #54   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2004, 11:58
ngreen ngreen is offline
Registered User
AKA: Nelson Green
FRC #1108 (Panther Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Paola, KS
Posts: 821
ngreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant future
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltacoder1020
hence definitively reversible. also known as not being one-to-one, as you said. Essentially, the inverse function is not actually a function. it's all good
At least when it is not defined. arccos x is defined from 0 to 1 and arcsin x from -pi/2 to pi/2. This makes it one to one and gives it an inverse function.
Reply With Quote
  #55   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-02-2004, 11:59
Ben Lauer's Avatar
Ben Lauer Ben Lauer is offline
Seshambeh Dareh Meyod
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 355
Ben Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer has a reputation beyond reputeBen Lauer 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
can't divide by zero....3rd to last step
Reply With Quote
  #56   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-02-2004, 06:23
Denman's Avatar
Denman Denman is offline
Tie Wrap-Not Cable Tie or Zip tie
AKA: Stephen Denman
FRC #0759 (Systemetric)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 817
Denman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud ofDenman has much to be proud of
Send a message via ICQ to Denman Send a message via AIM to Denman Send a message via MSN to Denman Send a message via Yahoo to Denman
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltacoder1020
squaring is not a 1 to 1 operation, thus you cannot do the proof backwards, and thus it is not valid.

x^2 = y^2 --/--> x = y
(x squared = y squared) does not imply (x = y)
at least someone found the correct reason for it being incorrect


Quote:
You can't get the square root of 1 equal to -1 so it fails.
What is the sqrt of 1?

Consider that if you square -1 you get 1 and so the sqrt of 1 is -1 or 1
__________________
I am an ex-member of team 759.
759: regional winners with 522 and 233 NYC (2004)


FIRSTWiki.org - Contribute, learn, inspire.

"Teach the way of the GP and the way of the GP shall teach you" - Me
Reply With Quote
  #57   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2004, 16:34
ngreen ngreen is offline
Registered User
AKA: Nelson Green
FRC #1108 (Panther Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Paola, KS
Posts: 821
ngreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant futurengreen has a brilliant future
Re: .999~ = 1

Anyone want to help me with this one?

Find the fallacy in the following argument that 0 = 1.

dv = dx --> v = Integral (dx) = x
u = 1/x --> du = -1/(x squared) dx

0 + Integral (dx/x) = (1/x)(x) - Integral ((-1/(x squared)(x)) dx = 1 + Integral (dx/x)

So, 0 = 1

It is integration by parts ( integral (u dv) = uv - integral (v du)). I should be figuring it out myself but when I saw the problem I thought of all of you.
Reply With Quote
  #58   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2004, 17:16
FotoPlasma FotoPlasma is offline
\: |
no team
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,900
FotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond reputeFotoPlasma has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to FotoPlasma
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denman
Consider that if you square -1 you get 1 and so the sqrt of 1 is -1 or 1
Given that you're working with reals, it's true that you can square a negative number, but the square root function only outputs positive numbers.

sqrt(1) /= 1 or -1
+/-1^2 = 1
__________________
I played hacky sack with Andy Baker.

2001-2004: Team 258, The Sea Dawgs
2005: Team 1693, The Robo Lobos
Reply With Quote
  #59   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-03-2004, 20:42
deltacoder1020's Avatar
deltacoder1020 deltacoder1020 is offline
Computer Guy
AKA: Dav
#1020 (The Indiana Prank Monkeys)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Muncie, Indiana
Posts: 340
deltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura aboutdeltacoder1020 has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to deltacoder1020
Re: .999~ = 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngreen
Anyone want to help me with this one?

Find the fallacy in the following argument that 0 = 1.

dv = dx --> v = Integral (dx) = x
u = 1/x --> du = -1/(x squared) dx

0 + Integral (dx/x) = (1/x)(x) - Integral ((-1/(x squared)(x)) dx = 1 + Integral (dx/x)

So, 0 = 1

It is integration by parts ( integral (u dv) = uv - integral (v du)). I should be figuring it out myself but when I saw the problem I thought of all of you.
constant of integration.
__________________
Team 1020, the Indiana Prank Monkeys (www.team1020.org)
Reply With Quote
  #60   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-03-2004, 15:03
Dejhan_Tulip Dejhan_Tulip is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bolivia
Posts: 12
Dejhan_Tulip has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Talking Re: .999~ = 1

Everyone's proving stuff...
Well... 2 = 1
Why ??

Check this out... nothing illegal and you can go backwards

a = b
ab = b^2
ab - a^2 = b^2 - a^2
a(b-a) = (b-a)*(b+a)
a = b+a

So if a=1, b=1 too (since the first thing I assumed was a = b )

1 = 1+1 ???

Have fun...
Don't flame... I am putting this to have some fun
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 02:54.

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