• Welcome to Valhalla Legends Archive.
 
Main Menu

0.999~

Started by Blaze, May 08, 2004, 10:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Blaze

Quote
Mitosis: Haha, Im great arent I!
hismajesty[yL]: No

j0k3r

QuoteAnyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin
John Vo

Raven

Quote from: j0k3r on May 09, 2004, 07:37 AM
Idiot.

Why must you constantly take it upon yourself to insult other forum users? Not everyone was aware of that April Fool's Joke. Misinterpretting its intentions doesn't make one an "idiot". Every other post that you've been making lately had something to do with insulting another user on this forum, and it's getting to be quite annoying. You should reconsider making such posts. :)

j0k3r

If I don't say something, that user will go on making stupid posts about things that are outdated and/or fake (what kind of an idiot takes news seriously that was posted on april 1st anyways? And it's in the damn URL). It's people like me who make users think twice before posting.

There is no way to accidently misinterperate that, you have to be an idiot not to realize what's going on. What sort of a company would make a statement on that sort of thing anyways?
QuoteAnyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin
John Vo

iago

Regardless of the meaning, it's still an interesting math problem.  And this is a math forum.  If he had used a different site that proves the same thing, would he still be an idiot?
This'll make an interesting test for broken AV:
QuoteX5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*


Yoni

This is my math forum and everything I say here is right.

0.999 (9's repeating forever) = 1

If you wish to argue:

1. If you didn't learn calculus (or tried but failed), don't even bother.
2. If you passed calculus, and still wish to argue, you'll have to pass through me.

MyndFyre

Part of the reason that was posted, though, I think was because there was a big debate actually going on at the Blizzard Bnet forums, about whether or not this was the case.

But yes, 0.9999~ = 1.  :)
QuoteEvery generation of humans believed it had all the answers it needed, except for a few mysteries they assumed would be solved at any moment. And they all believed their ancestors were simplistic and deluded. What are the odds that you are the first generation of humans who will understand reality?

After 3 years, it's on the horizon.  The new JinxBot, and BN#, the managed Battle.net Client library.

Quote from: chyea on January 16, 2009, 05:05 PM
You've just located global warming.

iago

well, if by 0.9999 ~= 1, you mean is approximately equal to, then yes :)
This'll make an interesting test for broken AV:
QuoteX5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*


Hitmen

Quote from: Myndfyre on May 09, 2004, 05:18 PM
Part of the reason that was posted, though, I think was because there was a big debate actually going on at the Blizzard Bnet forums, about whether or not this was the case.

But yes, 0.9999~ = 1.  :)
There's a big debate about it on the bnet forums roughly every two weeks.

Raven

Quote from: j0k3r on May 09, 2004, 02:15 PM
If I don't say something, that user will go on making stupid posts about things that are outdated and/or fake (what kind of an idiot takes news seriously that was posted on april 1st anyways? And it's in the damn URL). It's people like me who make users think twice before posting.

There is no way to accidently misinterperate that, you have to be an idiot not to realize what's going on. What sort of a company would make a statement on that sort of thing anyways?

You can make such comments without directly insulting the user.

I remember those debates on the forums; I was on the .999 != 1 side. Those there's some interesting proof otherwise, I'm sticking to that conclusion. I'll totally believe .999 ~= 1, but they are not equal. :)

j0k3r

Yeah I remember the "0.999_ = 1" debates on bnet forums, and I was on the "0.999_ != 1" side. The one time I bothered to jump in I argued that if you had 99.999_% of a file that you were downloading when your computer crashed, the file would not complete  the download and you would have to redownload it (this was a big deal on 56k).
QuoteAnyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin
John Vo

Yoni

Oh, no. I'm not going to be trolled on my own forum. Prove that you've passed Calculus (1 and 2 if possible) before arguing.

iago

*tries to remember formula for a derivative and fails miserably*

Btw, if you have 99.999~% of a file (assuming you have an infinite number of 9's), then you do have the whole thing.  

The limit as the number of nine's approaches infinite, the number approaches 1.  Although it never gets there, it will when you get to infinity 9's.  So there.
This'll make an interesting test for broken AV:
QuoteX5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*


Grok

Quote from: Hitmen on May 09, 2004, 06:21 PM
Quote from: Myndfyre on May 09, 2004, 05:18 PM
Part of the reason that was posted, though, I think was because there was a big debate actually going on at the Blizzard Bnet forums, about whether or not this was the case.

But yes, 0.9999~ = 1.  :)
There's a big debate about it on the bnet forums roughly every two weeks.

That's the longest running troll on bnet forums.  Been going on 6 years now?

Yoni

The % of a file argument is an awful argument.

The smallest unit that can be used to measure the size of a file is the bit. And it always has a whole number of them. A whole number. Meaning there is no infinitesimal size. Infinitesimal deviation from 100% is not even possible.