fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 7 days agoI just cited myself.mander.xyzimagemessage-square239fedilinkarrow-up1843arrow-down143
arrow-up1800arrow-down1imageI just cited myself.mander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 7 days agomessage-square239fedilink
minus-squareColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down12·6 days agoDo that same math, but use .5555… instead of .9999…
minus-squareBeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·6 days agoHave you tried it? You get 0.555… which kinda proves the point does it not?
minus-squareWandering_Uncertainty@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·6 days ago??? Not sure what you’re aiming for. It proves that the setup works, I suppose. x = 0.555… 10x = 5.555… 10x = 5 + 0.555… 10x = 5+x 9x = 5 x = 5/9 5/9 = 0.555… So it shows that this approach will indeed provide a result for x that matches what x is supposed to be. Hopefully it helped?
Do that same math, but use .5555… instead of .9999…
Have you tried it? You get 0.555… which kinda proves the point does it not?
???
Not sure what you’re aiming for. It proves that the setup works, I suppose.
x = 0.555…
10x = 5.555…
10x = 5 + 0.555…
10x = 5+x
9x = 5
x = 5/9
5/9 = 0.555…
So it shows that this approach will indeed provide a result for x that matches what x is supposed to be.
Hopefully it helped?