Is 1 = 0.999... ? Really?

That looks like commutativity.

Here it is:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=190558&p=2768316#p2768299

And you are ignoring it (:

Oh man, that’s embarrassing for me.

You have to understand that I had brain damage (was in a coma for four hours) because of a head injury.

I went from being a super-genius to just your run of the mill genius.

Yes, your neurons were not misfiring on this!

It’s communicative!

You mean commutative (:

chuckles

You know Magnus,

Brain damage did not impair my logic, just my memory.

The link you just sent me implies that I’m not allowed to make ANY argument that shows FOR A FACT that infinite and finite behave differently (supposedly (according to you) by my own reasoning).

Your argument about me contradicting myself by having every boy step forward and still all be holding hands is a fantasy of yours! It violates YOUR reasoning! Not what I’ve presented in this thread.

You know why I know I’ll win this debate?

Because I know god doesn’t exist.

Let me put this to you a different way.

Wtf left the thread because “nobody understands cardinality”. It went over your head!

There is a highest order of cardinality that in laypersons terms means “the infinite cardinal”

This is a proof of god.

Cantor knew it to.

This is not just a simple thread/discussion about math.

Our every sentence in this thread is also about whether god exists or not!

Very high stakes for lots of people.

I am not sure I understand what you’re saying here.

How? What’s wrong with it? Which part do you disagree with?

That’s precisely what it is.

I made a claim earlier that infinite sequences are infinite sequences.

(You can find it here.)

You responded to it by saying:

Then, I asked you:

You ignored these questions.

So I’m going to ask you once again:

How can a belief be both true and false?

Isn’t that a logical contradiction?

Magnus man, you are so incredibly naive. It makes sense to me though that if you can’t understand the implication that:

0.111… = 1/9

And

1/9 = 0.111…

They imply EACH OTHER and because they imply each other, they are equalities!

That you’d have the inability to understand that this is an argument about god!?

You’re amazing at inequalities ! (That’s an insult)

You are not good at equalities! (That’s an insult)

What does it mean to say that (0.111\dotso) implies (\frac{1}{9})?

What I’m saying is that it’s true on the surface, but totally false!

Let me give you the example of why I was sent to hell, and then hell beyond hell:

My argument was simple:

If you make suicide and homicide as easy as you could possibly make it (set suicidal and homicidal tension to zero), that whatever survived, would have inherent purpose to live! That’s the solution to ethics!

The argument was flawless!

I was wrong!

The problem on a higher plane of existence with this argument is that you can’t destroy existence, this “flawless” argument only sends people to hell.

Your argument from your mind seems flawless to you, but it is false!

So you’re saying that the statement (“Infinite sequences are infinite sequences”) is false and that it only appears to be true?

And you’re also saying that some infinite sequences are finite and some are infinite?

Is that correct?

Magnus! I like you because you stick with it!

Obviously tautologies aren’t false: “infinite sequences are infinite sequences”

With math, as with MANY aspects of life, it isn’t that simple!

Here’s an infinite sequence:

0.333…

ALSO a NUMBER!!!

ALSO 1/3rd!!!

Multiple equalities are true for EVERY possible number!! That’s the way it works.

No! I’m saying EVERY possible number is represented by a finite and/or infinite sequence and the reverse!

It’s really not hard to prove that magnus!

That’s not an infinite sequence.

If infinite sequences are not infinite sequences then what kind of sequences are they?

Are they sequences that are both finite and infinite?

0.333… right?

Well it’s not an infinite SUM! 0.333… is a discernible pattern that goes on forever (thus an infinite sequence!)

This is the problem we’ve been having. Your second quote encapsulates this problem! “If infinite sequences are not infinite sequences, then what kind of sequences are they?”

Well… tautologically, an infinite sequence is an infinite sequence! No argument from me there!

They are ALSO finite! In the form of a simple step procedure (a finite algorithm). Every infinite sequence is equal to a finite algorithm; they are equal.

That’s all my point was.

Let me try to explain why (0.333\dotso) is not an infinite sequence.

When we ask “Is (0.333\dotso) an infinite sequence?” what we’re asking is “Does the symbol (0.333\dotso) represent an infinite sequence?”

This means that we’re asking what the symbol (0.333\dotso) represents and NOT what the symbol (0.333\dotso) is in itself.

When we ask “Are numbers sequences?” what we’re asking is “Does the word represent a sequence?”

Since the word “number” does not represent itself, we do not care about the fact that the word “number” is a finite sequence of letters. In other words, the fact that the word “number” is a finite sequence of letters does not mean that what the word “number” represents (= symbolizes = signifies) is a finite sequence of letters (or a sequence at all.)

In the same exact way, the fact that the symbol (0.333\dotso) is a finite sequence of characters does not mean that it represents a finite sequence of characters (or a sequence at all.)

That symbol, on its own, is a sequence consisting of (8) characters. But the symbol itself does not represent a sequence of (8) characters.

(0.333\dotso) is a symbol representing certain number. And it’s not the only symbol that represents that number. There are many other symbols representing the same number. There are finite sequences of characters such as (0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + \cdots) as well as infinite sequences of characters that we cannot write down (since they are infinite) but that we can represent using other symbols (e.g. what is represented by the statement “a sequence that starts with (0) followed by (.) and an infinite sequence of (3)'s” is an example of such a symbol.)

Anything can be represented using any kind of symbol. The fact that you can represent a number using an infinite sequence DOES NOT MEAN that that number is an infinite sequence.

You can represent numbers with horses. That does not mean that numbers are horses.

The symbol is not the symbolized.

Sure… the map is not the territory.

We also have a property called “inferential logic”. We know that “x” implies “y”.

We also have inferential proofs.

The most basic inferential proof (and this always happens with any infinity). Is:

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 etc…

We know inferentially that’s no number repeats and it always grows in size.

Can any being hold all those numbers in its head to prove it ? NO! That’s why it’s called an inferential proof!

We infer from the sequence!

This type of proof is used in all infinity math!

What makes it? A sequence, a set of instructions, a discernible pattern!

Yes! 0.333… is a discernible pattern. That’s all a sequence is or need be

What does that mean?
(I asked this question before, you ignored it.)

I probably didn’t answer it because I was so incredulous that you don’t know what it means!!

It means what it says!!!

For example:

Can you hold every (implied) digit of 0.999… in your head at once?

Of course you can’t! Nobody can!