Harlem Globetrotters in War on Terror!

One divided by three produces a remainder. Sorry, you are not going to ever win that argument, it will always and forever produce a remainder. You can not divide one into three equal parts without having a remainder. The expression "1/3" is a division problem, it is 1 divided by 3, and it equals .3333E ...the e means the 3's repeat themselves forever. Unless you can reconcile "forever" you can't reconcile the remainder, it always exists. It exists yesterday, today, tomorrow, and forever, and if you want to start another 1500 post thread about it, it will still exist at the end of that.

Now fuck off!

Dixie...

You CAN reconcile forever, easily! Infinity is a part of many important equations. Are you literally suggesting that any equation involving anything to do with infinity or infinite remainders is illegitimate? The fact is, infinity is perfectly manageable, because infinity is PREDICTABLE. We can always expect the infinite remainder that 1/3 produces when divided in the decimal system to equal 1 when multiplied by 3. The infinite remainder is IRRELEVANT!

Get a doctorate in math so that you can understand how utterly wrong you are before continuing.
 
I think I can clearly see, those two values are not the same. You know... like when they give you those picture books and you have to pick the one that's not the same? Don't they have those in your retard school waterhead?
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraction_(mathematics)#Converting_repeating_decimals_to_fractions

Converting repeating decimals to fractions

Decimal numbers, while arguably more useful to work with when performing calculations, lack the same kind of precision that regular fractions (as they are explained in this article) have. Sometimes an infinite number of decimals is required to convey the same kind of precision. Thus, it is often useful to convert repeating decimals into fractions.

For repeating patterns where the repeating pattern begins immediately after the decimal point, a simple division of the pattern by the same number of nines as numbers it has will suffice. For example (the pattern is highlighted in bold):

0.555555555555… = 5/9
0.626262626262… = 62/99
0.264264264264… = 264/999
0.629162916291… = 6291/9999




----------------------------------------------

So...

0.3333333333333333... = 3/9

3/9 reduces to 1/3
 
Last edited:
I really do wish you guys could let this go, we have posted a completely silly amount of times about it, and you will never win the argument, math doesn't change. When you divide 1 into three parts, you get a remainder of 1/10, and you can keep dividing that remainder forever without resolving it, so we say that 1 can't be divided equally by three. This doesn't keep us from dividing things into thirds, and it doesn't mean thirds don't exist, nor does it mean we don't assume the three parts of thirds to all be the same value, and I have never argued that.

Now seriously, let's end this silly argument here and now, and if you want to claim you "proved me wrong" that's fine, I can live with it, just please shut the fuck up about 1/3 and move on with your lives!
 
Second proof that 1/3 times three equals 1:

x = 1/3 * 3

Now let's do the stupid thing and substitute 1/3 for the imprecise decimal equivalent:

X = 0.333333333333e * 3

Now let's multiply it together:

X = 0.999999999999e

So that's how far you got. But wait, let's mulitply both sides by 100:

100 * x = 99.999999999e

Now, x = 0.999999e right? So let's subtract x from 100x. Once you do that:

99x = 99

That makes sense to you, right? If x = 0.9999e and 100x = 99.9999e, then 99x equals 99.

So let's simplify further:

x = 99/99

And further:

99/99 = 1

This is the proof that:

So 1/3 * 3 = 1
 
I really do wish you guys could let this go, we have posted a completely silly amount of times about it, and you will never win the argument, math doesn't change. When you divide 1 into three parts, you get a remainder of 1/10, and you can keep dividing that remainder forever without resolving it, so we say that 1 can't be divided equally by three. This doesn't keep us from dividing things into thirds, and it doesn't mean thirds don't exist, nor does it mean we don't assume the three parts of thirds to all be the same value, and I have never argued that.

Now seriously, let's end this silly argument here and now, and if you want to claim you "proved me wrong" that's fine, I can live with it, just please shut the fuck up about 1/3 and move on with your lives!

1 can be divided equally into thirds. You are just too used to thinking in decimals. The fraction 1/3 is precisely 1 divided into three equal parts. You can even algebraically prove that the imprecise decimal equivalent of 1/3 * 3, 0.999999e, equals 1, as I've done above. Give up.
 
http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55746.html

From the link yurt posted, in case your too stupid to know how to click a link:

How can .999999.... equal 1?

Date: 03/21/2001 at 15:07:26
From: Emily F. and Jenny B.
Subject: .999999..... I still don't get it

Dr. Math,

In my math class in school, my math teacher always talks about how
whenever she has a problem she goes to your site and finds it or
writes to you. I have a problem.

I know .999999.... is supposed to equal 1. My teacher demonstrated
the subtracted thing and the other stuff you have on your site. I
still don't get it. If .99999999.... goes on forever, wouldn't it be
just a little below one? There would be just a tiny gap between it and
one. Please explain this to me.

Thanks,
Emily and Jenny

Date: 03/21/2001 at 16:22:11
From: Doctor Ian
Subject: Re: .999999..... I still don't get it

Hi Emily and Jenny,

There's no doubt that this equality is one of the weirder things in
mathematics, and it _is_ intuitive to think: No matter how many 9's
you add, you'll never get all the way to 1.

But that's how it seems if you think about moving _toward_ 1. What if
you think about moving _away_ from 1?

That is, if you start at 1, and try to move away from 1 and toward
0.99999..., how far do you have to go to get to 0.99999... ? Any step
you try to take will be too far, so you can't really move at all -
which means that to move from 1 to 0.99999..., you have to stay at 1.

Which means they must be the same thing!

Here's another way to think about it. When you write something like

0.35

that's really the same as 35/100,

0.35 = 35 / 100

right? Well, you can turn that into a repeating decimal by dividing by
99 instead of 100:
__
0.35353535... = 0.35 = 35 / 99

Play around with some other fractions, like 2/9, 415/999, and so on,
to convince yourself that this is true. (A calculator would be
helpful.)

In general, when we have N repeating digits, the corresponding
fraction is

(the digits) / (10^N - 1)

Again, some examples can help make this clear:
_
0.1 = 1/9
__
0.12 = 12/99
___
0.123 = 123/999

and so on.

So, here's something to consider: What fraction corresponds to
_
0.9 = ?

It has to be something over 9, right?
_
0.9 = ? / 9

The _only_ thing it could possibly be is
_
0.9 = 9 / 9

right? But that's the same as 1.

Ultimately, though, this probably won't _really_ make sense until you
come to grips with what it means for a decimal to repeat _forever_,
instead of just for a r-e-a-l-l-y l-o-n-g t-i-m-e.

When you think of 0.999... as being 'a little below 1', it's because
in your mind, you've stopped expanding it; that is, instead of

0.999999...

you're _really_ thinking of

0.999...999

which is not the same thing. You're absolutely right that 0.999...999
is a little below 1, but 0.999999... doesn't fall short of 1 _until_
you stop expanding it. But you never stop expanding it, so it never
falls short of 1.

Suppose someone gives you $1000, but says: "Now, don't spend it all,
because I'm going to go off and find the largest integer, and after I
find it I'm going to want you to give me $1 back." How much money has
he really given you?

On the one hand, you might say: "He's given me $999, because he's
going to come back later and get $1."

But on the other hand, you might say: "He's given me $1000, because
he's _never_ going to come back!"

It's only when you realize that in this instance, 'later' is the same
as 'never', that you can see that you get to keep the whole $1000. In
the same way, it's only when you really understand that the expansion
of 0.999999... _never_ ends that you realize that it's not really 'a
little below 1' at all.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you'd like to talk about this some
more, or if you have any other questions.

- Doctor Ian, The Math Forum
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/
 
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...

In mathematics the repeating decimal 0.999… which may also be written as 0.\bar{9} , 0.\dot{9} or 0.(9)\,\! denotes a real number equal to one. In other words: the notations 0.999… and 1 actually represent the same real number. This equality has long been accepted by professional mathematicians and taught in textbooks. Proofs have been formulated with varying degrees of mathematical rigour, taking into account preferred development of the real numbers, background assumptions, historical context, and target audience.

The fact that certain real numbers can be represented by more than one digit string is not limited to the decimal system. The same phenomenon occurs in all integer bases, and mathematicians have also quantified the ways of writing 1 in non-integer bases. Nor is this phenomenon unique to 1: every non-zero, terminating decimal has a twin with trailing 9s, such as 28.3287 and 28.3286999…. For simplicity, the terminating decimal is almost always the preferred representation, contributing to a misconception that it is the only representation. Even more generally, any positional numeral system contains infinitely many numbers with multiple representations. These various identities have been applied to better understand patterns in the decimal expansions of fractions and the structure of a simple fractal, the Cantor set. They also occur in a classic investigation of the infinitude of the entire set of real numbers.

In the last few decades, researchers of mathematics education have studied the reception of this equality among students, many of whom initially question or reject this equality. Many are persuaded by textbooks, teachers and arithmetic reasoning as below to accept that the two are equal. However, they are often uneasy enough that they offer further justification. The students' reasoning for denying or affirming the equality is typically based on one of a few common erroneous intuitions about the real numbers; for example that each real number has a unique decimal expansion, that nonzero infinitesimal real numbers should exist, or that the expansion of 0.999… eventually terminates. Number systems that bear out some of these intuitions can be constructed, but only outside the standard real number system used in elementary, and most higher, mathematics. Indeed, some settings contain numbers that are "just shy" of 1; these are generally unrelated to 0.999…, but they are of considerable interest in mathematical analysis.
 
Remember when you were a kid and Wide World of Sports would sometimes feature the Harlem Globetrotters in an "exhibition game" against the Boston Shamrocks? Meadowlark Lemon, Curly Neal and the boys would put on a real show, but sometimes, it would look as if Boston might have a chance, they would score a few baskets on the 'trotters, and the game would be kinda interesting for a bit, but eventually, the guys would stop fooling around and put them away soundly in the end. It was always entertaining, and you always knew the Globetrotters would win, but it was funny to watch those guys from Boston as they honestly seemed to think they may have a chance at beating the world-famous superstars. They never did.

Well, I think I figured out what is going on with the US and the War on Terror! We are the Harlem Globetrotters! It's not entertaining enough if we just put alQaeda and the Terrorists away with no contest! We have to let them make it interesting! Oh, we could get serious about it, and trounce them without any effort at all, but what is the "fun" in that? It's more intriguing if we allow the liberal clowns to guffaw it up a bit, goof around and let the opposition score a few points on us, make the 'visitors' think they actually have a shot at winning, then eventually get down to business and put it away in the end.

This is how we ended up with an inexperienced president and an even more inexperienced director of the CIA... Hell, maybe Obama should appoint Curly Neal as Homeland Security Director, and Meadowlark can be the FBI head! It couldn't get much more comical than what we have now. Yep... I can see the Globetrotters taking Meadowlark out of the game... he goes to the bench and begins getting a pedicure, as the water boy goes in as his replacement, and the Shamrocks actually take the lead for the first time in the game! That was funny, funny stuff!

Anyone wishing to comment on the original post, please do so. Apparently retarded people have hijacked the thread to have an elementary math class.
 
Anyone wishing to comment on the original post, please do so. Apparently retarded people have hijacked the thread to have an elementary math class.

You diverted the thread when you claimed you haven't been wrong about anything in years. This is a glaring example of you being factually incorrect and your unwillingness to admit that you are incorrect.
 
Remember when you were a kid and Wide World of Sports would sometimes feature the Harlem Globetrotters in an "exhibition game" against the Boston Shamrocks? Meadowlark Lemon, Curly Neal and the boys would put on a real show, but sometimes, it would look as if Boston might have a chance, they would score a few baskets on the 'trotters, and the game would be kinda interesting for a bit, but eventually, the guys would stop fooling around and put them away soundly in the end. It was always entertaining, and you always knew the Globetrotters would win, but it was funny to watch those guys from Boston as they honestly seemed to think they may have a chance at beating the world-famous superstars. They never did.

Well, I think I figured out what is going on with the US and the War on Terror! We are the Harlem Globetrotters! It's not entertaining enough if we just put alQaeda and the Terrorists away with no contest! We have to let them make it interesting! Oh, we could get serious about it, and trounce them without any effort at all, but what is the "fun" in that? It's more intriguing if we allow the liberal clowns to guffaw it up a bit, goof around and let the opposition score a few points on us, make the 'visitors' think they actually have a shot at winning, then eventually get down to business and put it away in the end.

This is how we ended up with an inexperienced president and an even more inexperienced director of the CIA... Hell, maybe Obama should appoint Curly Neal as Homeland Security Director, and Meadowlark can be the FBI head! It couldn't get much more comical than what we have now. Yep... I can see the Globetrotters taking Meadowlark out of the game... he goes to the bench and begins getting a pedicure, as the water boy goes in as his replacement, and the Shamrocks actually take the lead for the first time in the game! That was funny, funny stuff!

It would take a real effort to come up with something more idiotic than this.
 
1/9 = .11111111111e
2/9 = .22222222222e
3/9 = .33333333333e
4/9 = .44444444444e
5/9 = .55555555555e
6/9 = .66666666666e
7/9 = .77777777777e
8/9 = .88888888888e
9/9 = .99999999999e


But 9/9 also equals one. So .999999999e equals 1.
 
Back
Top