.999 repeating and 1 are not the same quantity

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 1, 2021, 5:22:07 PM4/1/21

to

Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.

Mitchell Raemsch

Isidro Abitante Jr

unread,

Apr 1, 2021, 5:36:22 PM4/1/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.

You have to present your monkey, if you want us to collaborate. In math
and physics. This is how it works. Say, your monkey is the
*_covid_freedom_passport_* you have to present.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 1, 2021, 8:11:45 PM4/1/21

to

On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 2:36:22 PM UTC-7, Isidro Abitante Jr wrote:
> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
> You have to present your monkey,

What monkey did you come from you moron?

Mitchell Raemsch

Sergio

unread,

Apr 1, 2021, 10:08:55 PM4/1/21

to

ask your mom which monkey left you at the doorstep

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 6, 2021, 1:20:06 AM4/6/21

to

torsdag 1 april 2021 kl. 23:22:07 UTC+2 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

there are no infinitesimals in real numbers. 0.999...+0=1

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 6, 2021, 1:05:54 PM4/6/21

to

Sure there are. They are fundamental zelos...

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 1:14:33 AM4/7/21

to

nope, real numbers are archimedian meaning no infinitesimals and no infinities in it :)

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 12:59:50 PM4/7/21

to

You are unreal zelos. The first quantity is you moron.

Michael Moroney

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 2:04:03 PM4/7/21

to

Roy Masters, there is no 'first quantity' among the reals. How many
times does Zelos have to tell you the reals are Archimedian? Do you even
know what that means?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 2:07:40 PM4/7/21

to

That man was an ancient mathematician...
I have zero math win with first quantity after...

Mitchell Raemsch

Edkah Bearden

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 2:41:43 PM4/7/21

to

Michael Moroney wrote:

> On 4/7/2021 12:59 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2021 at 10:14:33 PM UTC-7, zelos...@gmail.com

>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>> nope, real numbers are archimedian meaning no infinitesimals and no
>>> infinities in it
>>

>> You are unreal zelos. The first quantity is you moron.
>>
> Roy Masters, there is no 'first quantity' among the reals. How many
> times does Zelos have to tell you the reals are Archimedian? Do you even
> know what that means?

if you are so good a person, why don't you go outside and plant a tree?
You just talk like an obergruppenfuhrer.

Greta Baine

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 2:55:26 PM4/7/21

to

On 4/1/2021 2:22 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

Stop reposting this you retarded
mouthload of Bolivian goat testicles.

Sergio

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 3:43:58 PM4/7/21

to

nope,

the first quantity is 1,

the second quantity is 2

the zero quantity is Mitch

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 5:41:29 PM4/7/21

to

Zero math is a win.
Mathematical God begins at zero...

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 7, 2021, 5:42:28 PM4/7/21

to

On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 at 11:55:26 AM UTC-7, Greta Baine wrote:
> On 4/1/2021 2:22 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch
> Stop reposting this you retarded

I must have done something right you moron...

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 1:19:57 AM4/8/21

to

Archimedes was an ancient mathematician
Archimedian is a PROPERTY, do you know what this property entails?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 12:25:45 PM4/8/21

to

A property of what moron zelos...

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 4:16:19 PM4/8/21

to

The set of "Real Numbers" bigot mitch.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 5:03:34 PM4/8/21

to

You and zelos are the real bigot.
There is a fundamental first quantity you morons...

Mitchell Raemsch

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 5:42:37 PM4/8/21

to

ITYM bigots.

> There is a fundamental first quantity you morons...

Is it greater than zero, or is it 'greater than zero'?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 6:26:20 PM4/8/21

to

It is nonzero you moron...

Zero math is a win.

Mitchell Raemsch

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 7:05:52 PM4/8/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com formulated the question :

That is a non-answer.

Chris M. Thomasson

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 7:20:29 PM4/8/21

to

I have a strong feeling that Mitch is a Bot!

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 8, 2021, 7:41:31 PM4/8/21

to

Chris M. Thomasson formulated the question :

Why would a bot mess with the formatting so much that my "ITYM bigots."
string gets posted as something he said, I wonder? Even for a bot he's
pretty stupid. He did seem to pick up on the word bigot eventually.

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 1:12:19 AM4/9/21

to

algebraic structures you imbecile.

Real numbers are an archimedian FIELD.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 1:07:17 PM4/9/21

to

calculus has pointed out that zero and infinitesimal are the same...
But not exactly the same. Just closest to it you moron zelos.

Michael Moroney

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 1:33:54 PM4/9/21

to

Wrong. A field is where a farmer grows corn and cows.
Archimedes was a mathematician, not a farmer.

Smitch, a.k.a. Roy Masters

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 1:38:25 PM4/9/21

to

On Friday, April 9, 2021 at 10:33:54 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 4/9/2021 1:12 AM, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > torsdag 8 april 2021 kl. 18:25:45 UTC+2 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> >> On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 at 10:19:57 PM UTC-7, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Archimedes was an ancient mathematician
> >>> Archimedian is a PROPERTY,
> >> A property of what moron zelos...
> >
> > algebraic structures you imbecile.
> >
> > Real numbers are an archimedian FIELD.
> >
> Wrong. A field is where a farmer grows corn and cows.

Those cows are out standing in their field...

-<@>-

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 1:49:10 PM4/9/21

to

On 4/9/2021 10:38 AM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> -> blither <-
>
> -> more blither -<
>

Shut up imbecile.

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 9, 2021, 3:10:53 PM4/9/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com presented the following explanation :

Hey, Mitch told a joke.

Sergio

unread,

Apr 10, 2021, 1:39:56 AM4/10/21

to

IF Mitch is a bot, (and that is a big IF) then
his battery must of fell out,
his ALU has no carry bit
his CPU is in permanent thermal shutdown
his swap space is spaced
his fuse is still missing
his GPU let out all of it's smoke
his RAM is 4Mb TTL
his current use is 10^-9 amps
his cathode has no plate current
he thinks asynchronously
his NAND gate is 50 Watts
his core memory is 2 bit by 2 bit with reset line stuck high
his OS is FORTH
He uses GWBASIC for internet access

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 13, 2021, 8:29:34 PM4/13/21

to

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there are no infinitesimals in real numbers. 0.999...+0=1
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure there are. They are fundamental zelos...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> nope, real numbers are archimedian meaning no
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> infinitesimals and no infinities in it :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You are unreal zelos. The first quantity is you moron.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Roy Masters, there is no 'first quantity' among the reals.
> >>>>>>>>>>> How many times does Zelos have to tell you the reals are
> >>>>>>>>>>> Archimedian? Do you even know what that means?
> >>>>>>>>>> That man was an ancient mathematician... I have zero math win
> >>>>>>>>>> with first quantity after...
> >>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> >>>>>>>>> Archimedes was an ancient mathematician Archimedian is a PROPERTY,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A property of what moron zelos...
> >>>>>>> The set of "Real Numbers" bigot mitch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You and zelos are the real bigot. ITYM bigots.
> >>>>>> There is a fundamental first quantity you morons...
> >>>>> Is it greater than zero, or is it 'greater than zero'?
> >>>>
> >>>> It is nonzero you moron...

1/3 and .333 repeating are not the same quantity.

Mitchell Raemsch

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 13, 2021, 8:38:55 PM4/13/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com formulated on Tuesday :

Of course not, but they are symbols representing the same quantity.

Chris M. Thomasson

unread,

Apr 13, 2021, 8:56:54 PM4/13/21

to

Dr. Robotinstein strikes again! lol.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 13, 2021, 10:35:34 PM4/13/21

to

What do you mean? You can't have it both ways.
They share an equality that is not absolute.

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 1:25:04 AM4/14/21

to

there are no infinitesimals in real numbers you moron :) That is what it means to be an archimedian field.

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 4:31:58 AM4/14/21

to

on 4/13/2021, mitchr...@gmail.com supposed :

An answer would be wasted on you.

> You can't have it both ways.

Yes I can because they both represent the same object in the set of
rational numbers even though one uses continued decimal expension and
the other the p over q representation where p and q are integers.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:04:32 PM4/14/21

to

Sure there are... they are fundamental quantities that build all others...

Go back to your books... you are not real... you moron...

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:05:40 PM4/14/21

to

So how are they the same but different you imbecile?

Mitchell Raemsch

Sergio

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:08:25 PM4/14/21

to

look in the mirror, if your left handed, the image in the mirror is
right handed, clearly not the same, but identically the same.

Sergio

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:09:13 PM4/14/21

to

Roy Masters is watching you this time...

Sergio

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:10:34 PM4/14/21

to

yea! go for it Mitch...

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 2:13:48 PM4/14/21

to

Where is the mirror for quantity order you imbecile?
So .999 repeating and 1 are not absolutely the same... you moron...
Math has to admit that.... they are different by the infinitesimal
and that gives them a different equality.

Mitchell Raemsch

Sergio

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 3:36:06 PM4/14/21

to

your infinitesimal is too FAT, you have been feeding it Doughnuts!
Doughnuts have first zero quantity center, and are exactly different.

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 4:05:49 PM4/14/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com was thinking very hard :

You can *see* how they are different. Their sameness is because they
represent the same numeric value.

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 4:11:35 PM4/14/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com laid this down on his screen :

However, they do represent the same rational number.

... you bigoted, imbecilic, moronic, stupid, c'mon help me out here,
there has to be more four ways to represent your intellect.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 6:22:35 PM4/14/21

to

No. There is another equality. It is where quantities
are infinitely close together such as an infinite sequence
made up of the infinitesimal... .999 repeating and 1
are the other equality but they are not absolutely
the same.

Mitchell Raemsch

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 7:35:33 PM4/14/21

to

mitchr...@gmail.com used his or her keyboard to write :

No, they are both representations of rational numbers. If they were
"different" rational numbers then there would be another rational
number between them which would have its own decimal representation
which differs from either of them.

There is no way for a continued decimal expansion representation to be
in between these other representations and each 'real' number has at
least one CDE representation.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 7:49:56 PM4/14/21

to

How is .999 repeating rational?
It and one are not the same quantity.
They share an infinitesimal difference.
Add that and you get to 1.

Mitchell Raemsch

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 8:40:24 PM4/14/21

to

After serious thinking mitchr...@gmail.com wrote :

Rational numbers have repeating or terminating (repeating zeroes)
continued decimal expansions (CDEs).

> It and one are not the same quantity.

Yes they are, and they are resistant to your repeated claims to the
contrary.

> They share an infinitesimal difference.

No difference whatsoever.

> Add that and you get to 1.

Still, no.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2021, 10:53:46 PM4/14/21

to

So are they repeating or are they terminating you imbecile?

> continued decimal expansions (CDEs).
> > It and one are not the same quantity.
> Yes they are, and they are resistant to your repeated claims to the
> contrary.

No they are not. They are just infinitely close behaving the same.

> > They share an infinitesimal difference.
> No difference whatsoever.
> > Add that and you get to 1.
> Still, no.

They have an non absolute equality instead.

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 1:24:38 AM4/15/21

to

nope, real numbers are archimedian, how many times do I have to tell you?

Michael Moroney

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 1:52:44 AM4/15/21

to

1) Because any number with a repeating sequence is rational. 0.999...
(obviously) has a repeating sequence of 9.
2) Because 0.999... is exactly equal to 1, and 1 is rational.

> It and one are not the same quantity.

Repeating your mistake doesn't make your mistake not a mistake.

FromTheRafters

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 5:21:49 AM4/15/21

to

It happens that mitchr...@gmail.com formulated :

Yes. When they repeat zeroes, was call them terminating.

Sergio

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 7:49:15 AM4/15/21

to

try this on your calculator,
take 1/9 first you get 0.111... repeating

now multiply that by 9

what do you get ?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 1:19:54 PM4/15/21

to

Tell me what you moron?
The infinitely small is the difference between 1 and .9 repeating.
God creates gravity.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 1:21:17 PM4/15/21

to

You get another infinite sequence minus one.
This shares a sameness to 1.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 15, 2021, 1:24:30 PM4/15/21

to

Absence of quantity is real.
The only unreal is your imaginary math
you moron...

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 16, 2021, 1:28:31 AM4/16/21

to

1-0.999...=0

As I ahve stated, real numbers are archimedian which proves you wrong.

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 16, 2021, 1:29:05 AM4/16/21

to

do you even know what "real numbers" mean?

666

unread,

Apr 16, 2021, 1:57:55 AM4/16/21

to

can you prove that there are no infinitesimals in real numbers ?

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 19, 2021, 12:40:18 AM4/19/21

to

yes
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Archimedean_Principle

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 19, 2021, 12:53:45 PM4/19/21

to

Then what you mean by real?
Imaginary math is not.
Math named that right.
Why would it not?

Mitchell Raemsch

Earle Jones

unread,

Apr 19, 2021, 7:33:39 PM4/19/21

to

On Thu Apr 1 14:22:01 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

*
Mitchell: Your main problem is not mathematical. Your problem is linguistic.

You use words without definitions -- words not in use by knowledgable professionals.

What is the definition of "infintesimal" or "infinitely small"?

Question: Is 1.0 larger than 0.999....?

Thanks,

earle
*

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 12:59:33 AM4/20/21

to

https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Real_Number
Definition of real numbers

definition of complex numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Complex_Number

Definitoin of imaginary:
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Imaginary_Number

as you can see, the name "Imaginary" is historical, it doesn't mean what you think it means. Educate yourself for once.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 1:31:48 AM4/20/21

to

If two quantities are infinitely close
they share a sameness.

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 1:33:53 AM4/20/21

to

https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Real_Number
Definition of real numbers

definition of complex numbers
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Complex_Number

Definitoin of imaginary:
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Definition:Imaginary_Number

Real numbers have no infinitesimals so they are equal :)

Chris M. Thomasson

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 1:40:43 AM4/20/21

to

Is that your definition of a sort of, limit? This "sameness" you write
about?

So, in your terms: .999... shares a "sameness" with 1 because in the
strictly step-by-step decimal expansion the iterates get arbitrarily, or
infinitely close, to 1?

Is that fair enough to what you are getting at?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 1:34:54 PM4/20/21

to

.999 repeating and 1 are infinitely close to being equal.

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 20, 2021, 1:36:19 PM4/20/21

to

They are not the same limit.

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 21, 2021, 12:58:56 AM4/21/21

to

As I have shown, there are no infinitesimals so there is no "infinitely close" in real numbers. SO you are wrong, they are exactly equal

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 21, 2021, 1:53:10 PM4/21/21

to

You have shown nothing. They are not the same quantity but they are next to each other
on a quantity line.

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 22, 2021, 1:29:49 AM4/22/21

to

I have shown that reals are archimedian and hence no infinitesimals exists. So you are again, as always, WRONG!

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 22, 2021, 2:04:08 PM4/22/21

to

No you have not. The only unreal is the imaginary math...
and you yourself...

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 25, 2021, 2:14:48 PM4/25/21

to

.999 repeating and 1 are not the same limit...

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

unread,

Apr 25, 2021, 3:30:01 PM4/25/21

to

On 4/25/2021 2:14 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

> .999 repeating and 1 are not the same limit...

They certainly are the same.

∑ₙ₌₁᪲ 9/10^n = 1.

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 26, 2021, 1:23:03 AM4/26/21

to

I have shown it, I gave links to proofs. So stop lying

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

Apr 28, 2021, 3:26:10 PM4/28/21

to

Go back to your internet bias...
You have proven nothing you moron...
Your imaginary math is only in your
imagination.. math admits it...

Mitchell Raemsch

Werner Oberman

unread,

May 4, 2021, 4:50:11 PM5/4/21

to

Once that thing goes towards infinity, it will NEVER converges to 1. You
just stated the constant 0.9(99) in sum form. Proof of failure of the
education system you've been washed through. You love him long time.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 4, 2021, 10:40:38 PM5/4/21

to

On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-7, Werner Oberman wrote:
> Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> > On 4/25/2021 2:14 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> .999 repeating and 1 are not the same limit...
> >
> > They certainly are the same. ∑ₙ₌₁᪲ 9/10^n = 1.
> Once that thing goes towards infinity, it will NEVER converges to 1.

.999 repeating is the fundamental quantity next to one
It converges by adding one more infinitely small...

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

May 5, 2021, 12:27:17 AM5/5/21

to

I have proven you wrong on everything.

Werner Oberman

unread,

May 5, 2021, 4:40:02 AM5/5/21

to

Where exactly would be that? It stays clearly that it can't. Go love him
long time.

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 5, 2021, 2:07:28 PM5/5/21

to

You are delusional. Zero math is a win....
Your math is imaginary you moron zelos.

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

May 6, 2021, 1:27:18 AM5/6/21

to

The delusional one is you whom do not understand basic mathematics, educate yourself.

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 15, 2021, 3:55:55 PM5/15/21

to

Em quinta-feira, 1 de abril de 2021 às 18:22:07 UTC-3 escreveu:
> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

You were kidding at April first.

Do you like the axiom of choice yes or not?

Does the number 6.999... = 7.000... exist?
How many zeroes may we put after the point?

<< The Cartesianory of aleph_k copies of {0, 1} exist. For every k. Including k = 10^69."

Does a polinomial in aleph_k variables exist?

Does any number exist?

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 15, 2021, 4:02:09 PM5/15/21

to

> > Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch

Some years ago, there was a John Gabriel. Is he died? How many names/faces would he have?

He's a polytope!

v - e + f = 1.999...

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 15, 2021, 5:47:20 PM5/15/21

to

If the universe were Euclidean,
then 2^(1/2) would exist and 2^(1/3) would not.

As nobody knows what is the geometry of the universe, like the curvature G,
then nobody knows what does exist? and what does not exist? at all.

Everything is approximately equal to anything.

Vinicius
2021/May/15th

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 15, 2021, 10:30:15 PM5/15/21

to

Space is flat but gravity is round...

Mitchell Raemsch

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

May 17, 2021, 1:16:30 AM5/17/21

to

but 1=0.999.... is always true in real numbers :)

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 17, 2021, 7:26:07 PM5/17/21

to

Em segunda-feira, 17 de maio de 2021 às 02:16:30 UTC-3, zelos escreveu:

I still don't know what's going on here.
How space is flat? Space of parametrizations? It doesn't exist.
They say that the light deflects and has mass m = 0. So it says what is a straight line.
If the metric where L^p then Pythagora would say to Anaxagora that: x^p + y^p = R^p

I want to put some P = power sets before N = naturals.
0 ~ N
1 ~ PN = R
1.9999... = 2 ~ PPN = PR
May I construct P^(10^69)N ?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 17, 2021, 10:03:20 PM5/17/21

to

They are different by the unlimited small fundamental.
They are not the same quantity. They are another kind
of equal.

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

unread,

May 18, 2021, 10:08:40 AM5/18/21

to

Roy Masters, what is the average of 1 and 0.999... ?

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 18, 2021, 1:29:24 PM5/18/21

to

On Tuesday, May 18, 2021 at 7:08:40 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 5/17/2021 10:03 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 10:16:30 PM UTC-7, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> but 1=0.999.... is always true in real numbers :)
> >
> > They are different by the unlimited small fundamental.
> > They are not the same quantity.

.9 repeating and 1 are not absolutely equal
there equality is based on an unlimited small difference...
The infinitesimal is the next thing to zero not quantity...

Michael Moroney

unread,

May 18, 2021, 1:45:31 PM5/18/21

to

So, what is the average of 1 and 0.999..., Roy?

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 18, 2021, 6:58:43 PM5/18/21

to

> So, what is the average of 1 and 0.999..., Roy?

Is dx = 0 or dx > 0? Is this a kind of game?
dx = 1/infty. What is infty?

60^2 + 11^2 = 61^2
5100^2 + 101^2 = 5101^2
501000^2 + 1001^2 = 501001^2
50010000^2 + 10001^2 = 50010001^2
5000100000^2 + 100001^2 = 5000100001^2
500001000000^2 + 1000001^2 = 500001000001^2
50000010000000^2 + 10000001^2 = 50000010000001^2
5000000100000000^2 + 100000001^2 = 5000000100000001^2
500000001000000000^2 + 1000000001^2 = 500000001000000001^2
50000000010000000000^2 + 10000000001^2 = 50000000010000000001^2
5000000000100000000000^2 + 100000000001^2 = 5000000000100000000001^2
500000000001000000000000^2 + 1000000000001^2 = 500000000001000000000001^2
50000000000010000000000000^2 + 10000000000001^2 = 50000000000010000000000001^2
5000000000000100000000000000^2 + 100000000000001^2 = 5000000000000100000000000001^2
500000000000001000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000001^2 = 500000000000001000000000000001^2
50000000000000010000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000010000000000000001^2
5000000000000000100000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000100000000000000001^2
500000000000000001000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000001000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000010000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000010000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000100000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000100000000000000000001^2
500000000000000000001000000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000000001000000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000000010000000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000000010000000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000000100000000000000000000001^2
500000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000000000001000000000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000001^2
500000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000001^2
500000000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000001^2
500000000000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 1000000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 500000000000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000000001^2
50000000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 10000000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 50000000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000001^2
5000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000000^2 + 100000000000000000000000000000000001^2 = 5000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000000000001^2

zelos...@gmail.com

unread,

May 19, 2021, 1:18:19 AM5/19/21

to

there are no infinitesimals in real numbers, I have told you this.

0.999....=1 exactly, no difference.

Vinicius Claudino Ferraz

unread,

May 19, 2021, 10:14:12 AM5/19/21

to

https://twitter.com/mathspiritual/status/1395018339089592324
a² + b² = (a + 1)²
x² + y² = (x + 5)²

The republicanies think that dx == 0.
The democratches think that dx > 0.
Therefore dx >= 0. haha

20² + 15² = 25²
1100² + 105² = 1105²
101000² + 1005² = 101005²
10010000² + 10005² = 10010005²
1000100000² + 100005² = 1000100005²
100001000000² + 1000005² = 100001000005²
10000010000000² + 10000005² = 10000010000005²
1000000100000000² + 100000005² = 1000000100000005²
100000001000000000² + 1000000005² = 100000001000000005²
10000000010000000000² + 10000000005² = 10000000010000000005²
1000000000100000000000² + 100000000005² = 1000000000100000000005²
100000000001000000000000² + 1000000000005² = 100000000001000000000005²
10000000000010000000000000² + 10000000000005² = 10000000000010000000000005²
1000000000000100000000000000² + 100000000000005² = 1000000000000100000000000005²
100000000000001000000000000000² + 1000000000000005² = 100000000000001000000000000005²
10000000000000010000000000000000² + 10000000000000005² = 10000000000000010000000000000005²

I insist. How many zeroes may Pythagora concat?

Charlie-Boo

unread,

May 19, 2021, 11:04:36 AM5/19/21

to

On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 5:22:07 PM UTC-4, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

You need to define "quantity".
They are both expressions although one is an integer and the other is an infinite series.
They have the same limit.
Showing equivalence between two objects of disparate types is of great value.
"The further a mathematical theory is developed, the more harmoniously and uniformly does its construction proceed, and unsuspected relations are disclosed between hitherto separated branches of the science." ~ David Hilbert

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 20, 2021, 2:13:21 PM5/20/21

to

Not exactly you moron...
.999 repeating and 1are unlimited close and
are not absolutely equal. Because eternal
quantity is a continuum .999 repeating
and 1 are next to one another...

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

unread,

May 20, 2021, 2:18:32 PM5/20/21

to

On Wednesday, May 19, 2021 at 8:04:36 AM UTC-7, Charlie-Boo wrote:
> On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 5:22:07 PM UTC-4, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Add the infinitely small to .999 repeating.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch
> You need to define "quantity".

It begins at its fundamental...
Where is your definition there you moron?
Go back to school. Quantity is built
fundamental and that is eternal.

Mitchell Raemsch