-4

What is the intuition behind the fact that:

$$ 0.9999999\ldots = 1 $$

My Teacher's Proof:

We know that any number which belongs to the interval $[0,1)$ can be uniquely written as decimal expansion:

$$ x=0.a_1a_2a_3 \ldots = a_1×10^-1+a_2×10^-2+a_3×10^-3 + \ldots $$

where the digits $a_1,a_2,a_3 \ldots$ satisfy the following:

Each digit $a_i$ is an integer in the 10-element set ${0,1,2,....,9}$

So, $$ 0.9999999 \ldots = \frac{9}{10} + \frac{9}{100} + \frac{9}{1000} \ldots = 9 [$\frac{1}{10} + \frac{1}{100} + \frac{1}{1000} \ldots$)] = 9 × \frac{1}{9} = 1 $$

My doubt:

Since

$$ [\frac{1}{10} + \frac{1}{100} + \frac{1}{1000} \ldots)] ≈ \frac{1}{9} $$

So $0.9999999 \ldots ≈ 1$ not exactly equal to $1$.

Am I correct?

Suppose some people jump towards the right with velocity $u$ relative to a cart. Let the mass of each person be $m$ and that of cart be $M$. If there are $N$ people then, $Nm=M$

Case 2: All people jump simultaneously.

$$ \Rightarrow Nm(u-v_B)=M(v_B) $$

Hence, $v_B=\frac{u}{2}$

Case 1: People jump one after other.

After the first man jumps off the velocity $v_1$, acquired by the cart to the left,

$$ m(u-v_1)=(M+Nm-m)v_1 $$

Hence, $v_1 = \frac{mu}{M+Nm}$

After the second person jumps off, the velocity $v_2$ acquired by cart to the left,

$$ m(u-v_2)+(M+Nm-m)v_1=(M+Nm-2m)v_2 $$

Hence, $v_2=v_1+\frac{mu}{M+Nm-m}$

Similarly, after the $n^{th}$ person jumps off, the velocity $v_n$ acquired by the cart to the left $(2≤n≤N)$.

So, $v_n=v_{n-1}+\frac{mu}{M+Nm-nm}$

Therefore the velocity $(v_A)$ after all people have jumped off,

$$ v_A=\frac{mu}{M+Nm}+\frac{mu}{M+(N-1)m}+\cdots+\frac{mu}{M+m} $$

How do I proceed from here?

Answer:

$$\frac{v_A}{v_B}=2ln2 $$

Aryan
  • 442
user75659
  • 280
  • 1
    "We know that any number [...] can be uniquely written as" That's an assumption. Under that assumption $0.999\ldots\neq1$, clearly. The question is, do we really know this? – Arthur Jun 05 '19 at 13:32
  • ^THAT is probably the better dupe. – Randall Jun 05 '19 at 13:35
  • $1/9=.1111...$ It's not approximate. – Cheerful Parsnip Jun 05 '19 at 13:36
  • 1
    One intuition for why $0.999\ldots =1$ could be the following: ask yourself what else it could possibly be! You might think that it is less than $1$, but if so, how much less is it? No matter how tiny an amount less than $1$ you claim it to be (e.g. $0.00000001$), you should be able to intuitively see that $0.999\ldots$ will actually end up getting closer to $1$ than by this (once you've gone past enough of the $9$'s). So $0.999\ldots$ can't actually be less than $1$. – Minus One-Twelfth Jun 05 '19 at 13:37
  • 0.999.... as defined by the question IS NOT A NUMBER. The question defines a procedure of adding many 9s to the end of a number which doesn't mean it must be a number. What we are talking of about is the LIMIT of the sequence 0.9, 0.99, 0999..., etc, Any 'proof' that doesn't address this issue is wrong. – JavaMan Dec 13 '19 at 09:56

1 Answers1

0

We know that any number which belongs to the interval $[0,1)$ can be uniquely written as decimal expansion [...]

This is not true. For instance, $\frac12$ can be written as $0.5$ or $0.4999\ldots$

And $0.999\ldots$ is exactly equal to $1$. If they were different, then their difference $1-0.999\ldots$ would be non-zero; but clearly $1-0.999\ldots = 0.000\ldots = 0$.

Aryan
  • 442
TonyK
  • 64,559
  • 4
    And why is $1-0.99999... = 0$? In my opinion you "prove" the claim by saying that it's true. – amsmath Jun 05 '19 at 13:43
  • @amsmath: because if any decimal digit were non-zero, it would lead to an immediate contradiction. – TonyK Jun 05 '19 at 14:35