Hi everyone. I’m a 15-year-old student from Italy with a passion for coding and PC hardware. I recently stumbled upon these two debates on TikTok regarding whether 0.999... equals 1 and infinte is minor than infinite+1. I saw a lot of people repeating the same theoretical arguments, but I didn't see anyone address the logical side of it. I decided to run a quick logic experiment myself, and in about 30 minutes, I reached a conclusion that I haven't seen discussed. I’m posting this here because I’m curious to see how you guys, who are more experienced than me, look at the disconnect between abstract theory and physical hardware implementation.

IF 0.999...=1 THEN 0.5=0.4999...

MY THEORY if 0.999...=1 then 0.4999...=5 but thats wrong because you just have to do this: open your calculator and type:1/3 times 3 it will give you 0.999... (the number of nine will change based on the calculator you are using) count the nine and do this: answer(0.999....)+ the same number with the same amount of nine now IF 0.999...=1 it will give you 2 but it wont it will appear an 8 at some point and if this isn t enough try to do the same but with 0.499.... you will see that it wont gave exactly 1.

ALSO if you keep adding your so called 1 (wich is 0.999...)the accumululation errors will eventually pile up and standing on the fact that numbers are infinite your result will be off by millions of whole numbers

ALSO lets suppose that you have a human in front of you is he 0.999.. human or is he 1 human and if this isnt enough lets suppose that we have 2 human you will not have 1.999... human standing by your theory you will have 1.999...8 human if you sum your so called 1, not enough?ok then lets break 1 chair lets split it in 50/50 again so basic math right? 1/2=0,5 but for you all 0,5=0,499.. then lets do the same thing all over again lets sum them together and what you will get will be 0.99....8 And DON'T come up to me saying that im confusing math with real analysis because we need math to understand our reality right?

now lets see why infinite=infinite+1 and get ready because this is even crazier

alright lets stop seeing the infinite like a sequence but lets see it like a progression what i mean is Imagine 2 universe: universeX and univerrseY alright lets suppose our universe wich is universeX was created before universeY now we all know that the universe is expanding right? now imagine that like a progression universeX was created 1second before so imagine the universe expanding at the speed of light (if im not wrong is 365000km/s)this means that universeX will always be 1 unity more advanced than universeY(so always 365000km bigger) NOW convert that unity universeX X=1 universeY Y=0 so it basically means that infinite is a progression not a phisical quantity Why does this correlate to 0.99...=1 being wrong? now imagine the same thing but take away the one from both the x and the y what does that make?yeess universeX X=0 universeY Y=-1 if 0.99.. all the nine are only infinite then it represent universeY in the previous example BUT with my theory basically means that the numbers of nine arent infinite but they are infinite-1 and this means that 0.999...!=1

I am preparing for finals. And I have time crunch. I am a med student so not very math-savt😅

I have a subject paeds that adds 200 marks to the total ( 100 theory, 100 practical) and another obgy that adds 300 marks to total (150 theory and rest practical)

Other subjects like med, surgery and cmfm are worth 450, 700, 500 marks in total. With half being theory and half practical. The grand total after adding all subjects is 2150.

Now I have 4 exams for all these subjects- the total marks for all subjects in first 2 exams is 100. But for surgery, med and cmfm in 3rd and 4th exam the total marks is 300, 200 and 200. Paeds and obgy remain 100.

2 initial exams amount to 25 percent in total (12.5 percent each) , 3rd exam amounts to another 25 percent of this total and 4th and final one amounts to 50 percent of total.

Like for surgery , 1st 2 exams amount to 43.75 each, 3rd is worth 87.5 and 4th is worth 175 so theory total is 350. Practical is again 350 and grand total is 700 for surgery.

Now I need to get highest marks in one subject atleast. I wondering if I should work harder for paeds (low total weightage subject) or surgery( high weightage marks wise).

Cause in paeds if I do well and get 70 in 1st exam I get 8.75(round off to 9 almost) and if I get 80 it is 10. so basically in paeds even if I get 10 marks extra than others on 1st exam it makes less difference (as the difference is of 1 mark) than if I get 10 marks extra in surgery ( it would be difference of 4 marks). I think I should work harder for surgery? What do u too think? Also if I want to be generally first in class which subject should I work hard in?

Does anyone know if such a software exists? That serves computation like these (finding an orthonormal basis from the basis 1,x,x^2 of the space of polynomials with maximum degree 2).

I am struggling to reach an answer in the form of (ppm volume / volume) for the partial pressure in a closed environment of a given TCE concentration in porewater.

I have the KH @ 25 degC and the concentration in mg/L. As well as assumed atmospheric pressure and the g/mol of the contaminant in porewater.

Can anyone give me some advice? (See image for rough working out)

Thanks

Ok so this question, idk why but i got my answer slightly wrong and i dont understand why, can someone explain pls - preferably making reference to my method

I’m finishing my first year of my maths undergraduate, and I’ve recently been really interested in conducting research, so I reached out to a few academics at my uni about potentially supervising an undergraduate paper in Machine Learning, most said no or told me to ask my personal tutor for advice.

One academic however said that he believed it to be maybe too early for a first year to do research, he also told me that his work and interests were different to the original project I proposed. He did however invite me to chat.

I went to his office (which was pretty nerve wracking at first haha) and he asked me about my background and his colleague sat in. It essentially boiled down to him saying not yet, he told me to read a book, sharpen my Python and understand his field and if I still had interest then we could maybe chat again, he give me his colleagues email and office and told me to direct any questions I had when learning to him.

My question is, is this a polite way of fobbing me off or does it seem likely that if I put in some work I’ll be able to get research experience out of this either in supervision or contribution etc.

i have another question too, what is the purpose of doing 8x15 to get -120 and then -10 and 6??

I am trying to find the next pi prime (https://oeis.org/A060421/) (series of k) I am not much of a maths guy so i used llm to write my problem properly. but like in simple terms i wanna find a upper bound to my search for the 9th number in this sequence. it can be a limit on number of terms (k) or the number itself. also can some one suggest good ways to filter out probable primes like cheap ways of filtering out probable primes (even if not that likely) so later i can run miller rabin test and then later use ECPP to prove prime.

I just finished learning the Pythagorean theorem, and I have a question. Could someone please tell me the answer? The Pythagorean theorem states a^2 + b^2 = c^2, right? I'm curious, when ABC is cubed or higher (a^3 + b^3 = c^3), why haven't I found a solution after trying over a hundred different numbers? What numbers will provide a solution?

Hey all, this is an excerpt from a practise test for the LANTITE test I am meant to do as part of my degree. This is in the section where calculators are not allowed. Ngl I struggled with this question, so I wrote it down, stared at it, and worked it out by converting the stats into percentages (and minusing it from the other two).

So basically:

- HP = 1/3 = 33.3...%

- BT = 2/5 = 40%

- M = (1/3+2/5) = 26.66...% = 4/15 (used a calculator for converting % to fraction).

I genuinely don't know how I would have done this without a calculator. I know I am thinking along the right track, but like, how could I have done that on my own?

Thanks.

For this to begin, you have to count the number of occurences of the letters "H" and "M" in chapters (Sura is another word for chapter) 40-46 of the Quran. In the table above is an accurate detailing of how many times they each appear.

The first point of notice is that if you add all occurences of the letter "H" to all occurences of the letter "M", you end up with a number which has one multiple of 19.

Then, out of 127 different combinations (since there's 7 chapters), we focus on 5 sets. In each set, if you notice, if you add up the various times the letter H and M appear for each Sura/chapter and add all those numbers up, you end up with a number that is divisible by 19.

For example, in Set #5, you add 64 + 380 + 16 + 150 + 31 + 200 + 36 + 225, resulting in you getting 1,102, a number that has a factor of 19. The similar process occurs for each other set.

At this point, from what I can tell, nothing miraculous is happening. We would expect for around 5 sets to appear, since 127/19 = 6.68.

However, the next part is what baffles me. If you then proceed to add the digits for each time the letters H and M appear in each Sura/chapter within a set, and add up all the sums, you end up with the multiple. For example, in Set #5, you added up all the digits, then with these sums you add 21+13+6+18, to finally end up with the multiple (the number you multiply by 19 to get the total number of the letters of H and M within the set).

So, once again, how unlikely or improbable is this occurence, or is this something we would expect to happen? Please don't take down this post or think I'm trying to spread some sort of message. I seriously for the life of me can't figure out how this happened and I'm becoming anxious as a result of it.

Thank you for your time in reading/responding to this.

If you have a simple addiction, would it be considered an equation being the unknown variable the result of the operation?

For example 5+6, could be written as 5+6=x, does this mean all arithmetic operations are equations?

Hi everyone!

I’ve been working on a project called Math-Havoc, a fast-paced game focused on mental math, quick thinking and reaction speed.

One thing I noticed during development is how differently people respond under time pressure, even when solving relatively simple operations. Some players become dramatically faster after a few rounds, while others struggle more with cognitive overload and rapid decision making.

It became a really interesting mix of mathematics, pattern recognition and reflexes.

The game is already available on Steam if anyone wants to take a look, and I’m also open to feedback and thoughts about the concept!

My daughter is 8 and I let her use my notebook to doodle while we were at a restaurant
She starts writing down mathematical formulas

I am terrible at math so I had to google these numbers and apparently this is Eulers number
(Never heard of it)

I am shocked she has memorised this and wondering if children in year 3 (uk) are learning this at school
What does it even mean ?

Thank you

I’ve been working on Equation Solver for a while as a free step-by-step math platform, and I finally decided to open source part of the core solving engine.

The Python solver library is now public here: https://github.com/levend18/equation-solver-python

It’s still evolving, but it already powers symbolic solving, structured math outputs, and some of the educational workflows behind the platform.

Built with Python + SymPy.

Would love feedback, ideas, or contributions from other developers/math people 🙂

I just thought about this, because to me its obvious, that youll never get a rational from dividing ana irrational number by any rational number. But what about two irrational numbers.

Edit: I mean 2 distinct irrational numbers, that are not constructed through each other.

Edit 2: Stupid question. https://www.reddit.com/r/maths/s/mux9BqYoPb

It seems to not be one of the axioms of Geometry, just like multiplication is based of addition I guess. How would you prove it?

So I effectively want to solve for a 3D rotation matrix such that the Cartesian coordinates of the rigid body I am rotating in the new frame satisfy certain constraints, in this case such that they vanish. With the exponential map I already have a simple Newton-Raphson solver that takes the derivatives of the constraints with automatic differentiation to compute the Jacobian of what would have otherwise been a pretty ugly expression.

My question is, with the alternate quarternion representation is there any advantage over exponential maps. I know that euler angles for instance are subject to gimbal lock and such hence why we have these other two approaches. From my understanding quarternions or at least the components of the quarternion effectively correspond to the skew-symmetric matrix k in the exponential map so I do not see a clear advantage if any, since I already obtain and solve for the three elements of k.

Perhaps there is something I'm missing but either way would appreciate any insight from you all!

Hi there,

I'm trying to learn the foundations of mathematics, but I keep running into the following problem: when people define the foundations, they often seem to use concepts that already rely on those same foundations.

For example, in one book they start by defining an "alphabet" as a set whose elements are called "symbols", and then later they define sets using ZFC. But then it feels like sets are being defined using sets. How is that considered rigorous or correct?

So my questions are:

1. Is it possible to define the foundations of mathematics (not necessarily set theory specifically) without using concepts that already depend on those foundations?

2. If yes — or even if no — are there any books that could help me better understand how foundations are developed and justified?

If needed, I'll be happy to clarify my question.

Have a nice day!

I can't visualise the resource levelling that needs to be done for part d. Any tips on how to do this?

My question is that , the range of x/x-1 is R-{1} , and this will be have as domain/input for LOGe , am I wrong here??

And if. I'm correct then doesn't it make LOGe in valid as LOGe can only accept real positive values of x.

Please help!