2004-12-19 [Kayne]: If you can explain to me when something in math can't be sure thus I will accept the fact that I might be wrong. Looks to me that I asked for an explanation. Ow but wait - you would probably don't want me too accept it. Anyway again no answer to my indirect question. How the hell is it possible that there can be a mistake in math?

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: 2 + 3 = 75. Oh look - there's a mistake. in maths *gasp*

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: and your right kayne, I don't want you to accept that you might be wrong. I don't care what you think about your own beliefs - what I'm asking is that you accept other's beliefs as 'plausible' instead of dishing out this highly patronising 'I accept you think you're not wrong' Bullshit.

2004-12-19 [Kayne]: No, there is a mistake made by the one who is writing. That "=" has no right in being there. Whilst in my proof every "=" has a right to be there.

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: And the one who has written, has written maths. There is an error in the maths.

2004-12-19 [Kayne]: Who is talking Bs now? There is no error in math. The error occurs when the writer writes a "=".

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: Once again, no one is talking BS. We're down to semantics again. Differences in opinion about the application of a language. Fucking Deal.

2004-12-19 [Kayne]: Oke. I deal. I deal with the fact that your opinion is plausible. Cause in your maths 2+3 = 75 isn't bullshit.

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: ... Retard. You really haven't understood our point of view at all; have you? Have you even tried. 1. In my maths 2+3=75, is bullshit, however - I call it an error in the maths, you call it an error in the pennr of the maths. Therein lies the only difference, you little pedant.

2004-12-19 [Kayne]: I was always tought not to have an arguement with people who start to curse. Anyway - I see where we have a difference so I'll deal with the fact that we disagree. Anyway - you study maths don't you?

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: not to curse? You've just used 'bullshit' yourself. That's more of a curse than 'retard'. Hypocrit.

2004-12-19 [windowframe]: And... I'm leaving this wiki now. I can see your point of view, I can accept why you believe what you believe - I can see Templar's point of view, and Deus's and I can accept why they believe what they believe. And I'm going to totally drop this issue. And if you want to be friends - you need to, too.

2004-12-19 [Kayne]: And if you want to be friends  => *Drops*

2005-01-22 [Sagacious Turkey]: if both sides are equal then if you multiply a number by both sides you should get the same number...

2005-01-22 [Kayne]: And we have the same number.

2005-03-02 [ilven]: WRONG: 9X= 8.999999...; what you did wrong is that you'r 0.999 actually this: 1/3= 0.333... -> 0.333x3= 0.999...; while it is 1, you forgot the restvalue!!!!

2005-03-02 [Kayne]: :p Waar zit dan de fout? *Advies: private message.*

2008-08-16 [Mortified Penguin]: That math is flawed! ...*eats ramen*... *refuses to believe it's validity*...

2008-08-16 [Mortified Penguin]: The example is correct until:

10x - x = 9x

9 = 9x

Why does "10x - x" become 9? It should really be 8.99991... Of course it will work out to be 1=.999 if you round up while working it out...

...point being...... I'LL KILL YOU- er, I mean, *eats ramen*...

2008-08-16 [Aradon Templar]: Actually, despite the fact that I disagree with the conclusion of this page, I will also argue that the math is correct, assuming that x=.999... like it says. Because when you multiply by ten, 10x becomes 9.999...9 rather than 9.999....0 like you've stated. The entire sequence after the decimal works out to equal 'x' again, so you have 9.x basically, and then you subtract the 'x'. I had argued originally that 10x is really 9.999...0, but I don't have the sufficient mathematics to prove it, and I doubt you do either.

2008-08-16 [Aradon Templar]: Unless, of course, I want to argue that .999... isn't equal to one, which is the conclusion this reaches if it were. But that's begging the question, assuming the proof is wrong to prove that the proof is wrong.