well 0.99999=1means 1-1/infinity=1
from which
-1/infinity=0
1/infinty=0
I still don’t understand what 1/infinity is, you can’t use “infinity” in an operation
Also the website you sent didn’t disprove anything, like the comment section said
Also the website you sent was roasted by basically all the comments 
1 Like
uh .999… * 10 is .999…0
.000…1 can fit between them though
1/infty is a small nonzero number
No it’s not, you guys are actually annoying me so much.
- Why do you care about the “0” at the end of a number?
- Where are you putting this 0 if there are infinite 9s?
No, 1/infinity is 0, because in the first place, you can’t divide by infinity. Also, infinity isn’t even a number, so it makes no sense to divide a number by it, especially being in the denominator. It’s like arguing that “1/0” is “0”, but there is no meaning for “0” to be in the denominator.
Okay, so if I put x/infinity into a limit, does it progress towards 0 or infinity?
Okay none of these arguments make sense, I’m sorry lol
How in the world did you get “-1/infinity=0” from “1-1/infinity=1”?
0, yet never reaches 0
Well no geometric sequence will ever converge according to your logic.
That will break so many proofs. It is fundamental any limit converges or diverges, can’t be in the “never reaches”
take the function 2^x for example. as x approaches negative infinity, y approaches 0, yet does not reach 0.
In math we define limits,
the limit of 1/n as n goes to infinity is 0 and we write:
lim 1/n = 0
which can be summarized as 1/inftinity = 0.
but say we have 2^x if x is negative 10, which is about 0.001. that is not zero. neither are other, smaller numbers
Okay but it is accepted that limits basically reach 0 or whatever number they converge to, and thanks for the explanation Guzman I was confused what he meant I did not know he was talking about limits or anything.
they approach zero
Lim_{x → -infinity} 2^x = 0
the values approach 0 … the limit IS 0.
Wait so now I’m confused. Does an infinite geometric sequence ever evaluate to something (converge), or does it just infinitely approach something?
So is @port wrong? I think so…?
From Wikipedia (with a reference), “In mathematics, a limit is the value that a function (or sequence) approaches as the argument (or index) approaches some value.” So when you say “converge” that is not necessarily a value that is reached.
A simple example is one of Zeno’s paradoxes, which basically works off the ability to infinitely divide a distance in half. Say you’re traveling from one location to another, each day you travel halfway to your intended location. Day 1, you travel halfway. Day 2 you travel another quarter (half of the remaining half). Day 3 another eighth (half of the remaining quarter, etc. The sum of each day would be the series 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ...+ 1/2^n. Because you keep halving the remaining distance, you would never actually reach a total of 1, but you approach it, so it converges on 1.
Well then 0.999… converges on 1? But how do we perform any operation on these types of number, that converge but don’t reach? That’s my question. I would believe that we just take that 0.999… = 1 because it gets infinitely close to 1 and you cannot define any gap between it.