• BachenBenno@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Mathematics is built on axioms that have nothing to do with numbers yet. That means that things like decimal numbers need definitions. And in the definition of decimals is literally included that if you have only nines at a certain point behind the dot, it is the same as increasing the decimal in front of the first nine by one.

    • Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s not an axiom or definition, it’s a consequence of the axioms that define arithmetic and can therefore be proven.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        There are versions of math where that isn’t true, with infinitesimals that are not equal to zero. So I think it is an axium rather than a provable conclusion.

        • Jack Riddle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Those versions have different axioms from which different things can be proven, but we don’t define 9.9 repeating as 1

    • aoidenpa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      That’s not how it’s defined. 0.99… is the limit of a sequence and it is precisely 1. 0.99… is the summation of infinite number of numbers and we don’t know how to do that if it isn’t defined. (0.9 + 0.09 + 0.009…) It is defined by the limit of the partial sums, 0.9, 0.99, 0.999… The limit of this sequence is 1. Sorry if this came out rude. It is more of a general comment.

      • BachenBenno@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I study mathematics at university and I remember it being in the definition, but since it follows from the sum’s limit anyways it probably was just there for claritie’s sake. So I guess we’re both right…