This number read as .9 recurring is an interesting one.

A wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999…

It leaves me in awe…

If 0.999… = 1

Then what would 0.888… would be is it 0.9, it should not be coz 0.8999… = 0.9

and can 0.8(888…) can this be 0.89? if it is then what is the difference?

So is it 0.888… < 0.8999… < 0.9

So if we have a class of numbers lets say recurring terminating

0.888… < 0.888…5 < 0.888…5999… < 0.888…6 < 0.9 < 0.999…

This is just a vague idea, but probably we will never contemplate the outcomes of our understanding. This faintly reminds me of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

This entry was posted on May 17, 2007 at 5:59 am and is filed under 0.999..., maths, random thoughts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

May 18, 2007 at 9:12 am |

Reminds me of the craziness of mathematicians… LOL.

May 21, 2007 at 7:05 am |

Fuzzy Logic Remember???

May 22, 2007 at 11:05 am |

Representation of real numbers using floating points is not UNIQUE, that is a number 1 can be represented both as 1.0 and 0.999999….. As far as mathematics is concerned there is ABSOLUTELY no difference among these two representations. There is a HUGE difference between terminating (or recurring blocks) and non-terminating floating point representations. Terminating (or recurring blocks) represent rational numbers (a proper subset of real numbers) and non-terminating numbers represent real numbers that are not rational (note that I am not calling them irrational). If anything this floating point represenation has some relavance to Cantor’s diagonalization and has nothing to do with Godel’s incompleteness.

May 25, 2007 at 3:22 pm |

> If 0.999… = 1

> Then what would 0.888… would be is it 0.9, it should not be coz

> 0.8999… = 0.9

No. 0.888… is equal to 8/9; i.e. 1 – 1/9.

> So is it 0.888… 0.888… This is just a vague idea, but probably we will never contemplate the

> outcomes of our understanding. This faintly reminds me of Gödel’s

> incompleteness theorems

…No. We know exactly the outcome of this. It has been understood, documented, recorded, and taught to first year Analysis I students for hundreds of years. And it has nothing to do with Godel’s theorems: Godel is about whether a set of axioms can ever be proven consistent, but that is irrelevent; if you take the set of axioms that comprise the real numbers and basic arithmetic, it is provable, unarguably, that 0.9 recurring is exactly and precisely equal to 1 in every possible way.

May 26, 2007 at 7:22 am |

I have written this not to prove/disprove anything mathematically, I am not good at mathematics anyways. but I see this as an intresting idea, and still people find it hard to accept 0.999… = 1 , although mathematically proved.

So this is more like playing with words and getting fun out of it.

May 31, 2007 at 11:37 am |

All Work and No Play Makes Jack a Dull Boy…

June 12, 2007 at 9:50 am |

Why chess has only 64 squares?

In how many years Sun will burn all its fuel?

2 to the power 64