Math Thread

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999…

there's a ton of proofs for it. if you don't wanna accept them, you're the math equivalent of a creationist

Do you agree that 1/3 = 0.333… ?

What math level is this?

in America: post graduate

in Europe: second year of high school

Graduate. They don't teach this in undergrad.
But you can discuss anything you like. I'm not even a graduate nor a math major.

Calc II in us (either that or my state really has shit education)

Somehow I doubt that

Tryin to be the next Yu Jianchun?

Nah, I just love math. It's also useful for my major.

I love the IDEA of math, I'm just fairly ignorant about it.

In fact, I just picked up a few books on the subject…
Are you familiar?

Nope. I don't like the books that talk about the beauty of math; I just read math textbooks.
I loved one particular book: A Book of Abstract Algebra. It was my first real experience with abstract algebra.

Ah… so what's it like being autistic?

Also, the first title is basically a textbook, the second is a loose history.

You mean I shouldn't learn about something I like and explore its greatness, and instead should just read about shallow explanations of why it's great?

"Mathematics for the non-mathematician" sounds like a very broad topic. If you've finished Calc, learn about some specific topic in math, like differential equations, real analysis, complex analysis, abstract algebra, topology, statistics, number theory, applied math, linear algebra, or linear programming.

No, that's not what I was implying.

That's the goal. But first, I just want to gain a better understanding of the broader significance of the different branches.

0.(3) or 0.(9) is not a number its infinite series. You cant express this progression with numbers. When people write (=) symbol after geometric progression, for instence, it means only aproximation.

Don't do that. Just go straight into the next thing after whatever is the last math course you took.
If it's Calc, go to Differential Equations.

...

It is a number. They both are. And they're also an infinite series. Those do have values, you know.
If you're familiar with infinite series, then I suppose you've taken Calc 2? Then you know that the series converges when |r| 0 such that |A-R| = e, where A is the approximation, and R is the real value of the approximated number.
If they wanted approximation, then they'd write ~ or something similar.
Now, if they did mean approximation, what is the e equal to in this case?

1 is limit of the 0.(9)

Why don't business majors understand basic math?

How should we teach math so that normies can actually understand more than just basic addition and subtraction? People legitimately consider fractions to be hard, when they're really just 2-tuples when you think about it. Same with complex numbers.

To be fair, complex numbers really are complex when you start talking about functions. You need 4 dimensions to represent them. Even if you do the color representation thing, the derivative still doesn't have an intuitive meaning like it has in the plane. Like what does a derivative equal to i mean?
And the average layman has no need for complex numbers. Fractions? Sure. Complex numbers? Absolutely not.

...

An n-tuple is an ordered sequence of n elements. A 2-tuple is a pair. Basically, they're multisets with ordering.

It's just fancy math-speak for "pair".
Like two numbers is a pair, 3 numbers is a triple, 4 numbers is a quadruple, n numbers are n-tuple.

The guy just said he doesn't know what 2-tuple means.
Don't throw rigorous definitions and "multisets" at him.

okay, but how are fractions that?

Things like 7/8 are basically (7,8).

But what if I'm trying to trick him into looking up set theory?

And since all rational numbers can be written as fractions, all numbers can be written as (a,b).

Since you seem into set theory, what's all this with "ZFC" and axiom of choice? What are they?
I kinda get that ZFC is a bunch of axioms for set theory, but I still don't understand what the axiom of choice is.

youtube.com/watch?v=BWUHgoUJFGM

Do you go to Holla Forums? Something about the MS Paint, calling people "morons" in his "proofs", and trying to "debunk" someone like Euler just gives off certain vibes.

He uses f(inf) as if infinity could just be placed in there like a number, instead of taking a limit, and he repeats this error over and over. The guy literally uses a circular argument in his document at the end of page 6. He says "we know" something, and uses it to prove itself.

Give me your own words. What does 1 - 0.(9) equal?

You cant use number and substract from it something that is not a number.

I know profs that would agree with that guy from video, so I dont think that he is in very marginal group.

And there are people who think the earth is flat and are not a marginal group. Are we to believe them and take their existence as proof that they're right?

So 0.(9) is not a number now? Okay. How was the guy able to compare something that is not a number to a number? Particularly, he said:

I dont take their existence as proof I replied to your first sentence.

1 is asymptote of 0.(9) so its always biger and never equal.

Aha, so it's comparable, so it's a number.
Because it's not equal, what is their absolute difference?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=x-fUDqXlmHM

I'm not a mathematician, but this seems to be a logical perspective on the matter.

So one has to be a mathematician to have a say in the matter? Like the millions of mathematicians alive and who have lived like Euler and Gauss that say 0.999… = 1 and demonstrated the application of such mathematical facts? Those kinds of people?

If you had actually watched the video, you'd have seen that it espouses a view which concedes that both perspectives could be true, depending on what you choose to believe.

Btw, I'm not one of the anons whom you've been arguing with.

bookzz.org

then just download any math books you want.

I have. What he's talking about is p-adics. And you don't have to "choose what to believe", because it's all true (except for one thing).
I made a post about it right here
And in math you don't "choose to believe" something. This isn't science where one day something is true then it might not be the other based on new data. This is math, where you don't have to go out into the world to prove something, and you can do it with just a pen and paper. It relies on absolute proof. No half-truths and believing like it's some sort of religion.

Now, as for the thing that bothers me, he implies that …999 = -1 in the reals, which is not true. It's only true for the p-adics (specifically the 10-adics). The reason …999 =/= -1 is that it grows without bound, while 0.999… is convergent.
Adding something convergent to something that is divergent will give you a divergent result, and you can do anything with that to give ridiculous results.

Math lost me when letters got involved…

You know, letters are just there to generalize things.
You wanna know what (3+1)^2 is, so you expand and get 3^2 +2*3*1 + 1^2. And then you wanna know what (4+1)^2 is and you repeat the process.
Eventually, you figure out you can make it more general by putting an x and a y instead of the numbers inside, like (x+y)^2 = x^2 +2xy +y^2.
Maybe you wanna describe the process of multiplying a number by two and adding one to it, and instead of writing this sentence out, you use "x" instead of "the number" and "y" instead of the result, giving you y = 2x+1.

Don't try to see math as these letters in front of you, but try to see the concept behind them and imagine what general things they're describing. That was how I understood calculus; imagining and visualizing.

...

i believe 1 + 1 = 3 because i define it that way

And what does that have to do with 0.(9)?

fuck math

it's good nigger

Anyone have tips for questions about rearranging trig equations? (Sec, cosec and cot inc)

My problem seems to be that there are too many roads to go down and i get lost.

Turn everything into basic sin and cos and rearrange from there. All trig identities are based on sin and cos identities.

Why are all my stats professors foreign and can't speak English for shit? I just gave up on the lecture and went to Khan academy.

I've never heard about it and I'm a math major…
It could just be that it isn't taught in conventional math classes and you need to look for a class that covers it.

...

I'm pretty sure eulers constant ends with …648281838171. Do I get a prize or something or do I need a spigot algorithm?? Lol

No I don't know the end of pi. It may be two or four different valid series of numbers.

No, it's only taught in Grad school.
You need a solid background in number theory and abstract algebra. (I think)

No. There is a way to write .33333…. So that I'd you multiplied by three it would be exactly 1 and not .99999…. But you have to make some concessions

No, both pi and e end with 4206969.

That's impossible or e^(pi*I) wouldn't converge to negative one if you represented the constants as infinity products.

Unless that was some kind of joke adding the ends of pi and e together. Someone steal this man's work

Whatever pi and e don't end the same because they don't start the same. I'm not saying there aren't constants that might have that behavior but common operators don't degrade like that over numbers that are so different.

Both 2.5 and 3.5 start different and end the same.

Then explain.

Hurhurhur were talking about infinitely long constants. I like you. Maybe you can come over to my house and fuck me.

Noes… :x I'll teach you an alternate form for doing foil but it looks like the synthetic form of division subbing multiplication

Never mind I'm not giving shit until I get pussy. Keep the thread alive.

Guess you're never posting it then.

(x+1)^2….
|(0123)
..111
…111
…121
1+2x+x^2

Get it? It's the smallest sample I can give without just layout out how to do some weird polynomial by some weird power and giving it away, gosh

What does this have to do with anything?

I can't space it out right maybe I have to use … To space shit out. One . is a numerical space. The 121 line has an extra dot due to drunk

It's the synethic form of that shit I was talking aboit
. it doesn't exist on Google so have fun finding. I'm just going to look at my method and jerk off allll day over it

(x+1)^3|
(0123)
111 +
111 +
11 +
1 + 3x + 3x^2 + x^3

Yea that's right… Just look at it.

And…?

I'm solving polynomials in a lattice what the fuck

I bet you shit your pants the first time you saw the Japanese draw squares to solve multiplication

...

You're gay. You are clearly jealous. Have you ever had angry jealous sex before?

I've never had sex before.
And I'm bi.

Give me a formula that replaces the gamma function but requires the use of the input as a power to both the root of 5 and 2 that satisfies every input for gamme that is not a fraction. Do it fgt

I did it once and threw away the notes please do it because I can't fucking remember it and replacing Gama with 2 and 5 instead seems cool

How have you never had sex. Just go ask people until someone says yes. Quit acting like people don't want it. Everyone wants sex damn dude

gamma(x) + (2^x-2^x+5^x-5^x).
Suck it, faggot.

In the 5-adics, what is the expansion of 1/5 (1/10 in 5-adics)? Is there some expansion that goes off to the right, or is it simply 0.1 (5-adic) and multiples of 5 are a special case in 5-adic?

it doesnt?

it's 22/7! happy Pi Appromixation Day, mathfags!

Nope.

Celebrations like these are retarded.

why do you hate fun?

Fun is evil, toxic and dangerous.

It's just fucking stupid.
Celebrate father's day, sure, go ahead (even though I don't like my own dad). Celebrate earth day, it's fine.

But celebrating a fucking number pattern? It's like people have ran out of good things in life to celebrate about that they have to make up new shit. It's simply stupid and nonsensical.

Holy shit, I was right; this guy is Holla Forums:
spacetimeandtheuniverse.com/math/4507-0-999-equal-one-378-print.html
Literally rants about Jews.

I read about split-complex numbers and dual numbers.
The former is based on the idea that j^2=+1 (j not 1 nor -1), and the latter is based on b^2 = 0 (b not 0).
The interesting thing about dual numbers is that the series expansion of f(bx) is just a linear polynomial. So e^(bx) = 1+bx, sin(bx) = sinh(bx) = bx, cos(bx) = cosh(bx) = 1.

Vid attached shows the effects of multiplying a number by a unit length number in that system. Complex numbers have a unit circle (makes most sense), split complex have a unit hyperbola, dual numbers have unit lines.

Meth

Fourier analysis is boss.

Fourier you

Was getting transformed part of your plan?

Not much interest in math. Have a webm.

bump

hwere mah meth

Ax(R(x)=H(x))
Into English where:
(R(x) is "x coming to slam"
and H(x)) is "x wanting to jam"
The domain consists of all people