10 Misconceptions Debunked! 

Brilliant. Of course, I'm a teacher, so I love that.

A few weeks ago, my teacher played a Crash Course video; it was the first time I had seen one, and I just about lost my mind in the back of the classroom because I saw John Green )and I didn't even know he made this stuff). XD

I did it

It is "The Edge"

I also did it and its a picture of a man. An artist i imagine. Who he is beats me tho.

Victoria Morales He is "Edge" of the band U2

I think it's of Bono

I think I'm going to go watch the entire crash course of world history all over again...

Ryan Masad Same here! XD

That would have been great for AP exam :)

Man Crash Course is just amazing

Maybe because it's the BEST BAND EVER

how are you doing now julia

thats gotta be a weird conversation "hey I think you're from a less evolved race then I am but I'm gonna take a few of your teeth to put in my mouth"

source?

I bet those slaves are dead by now, thus those a teeth of dead people.

When he first said "the need to go deeper" I was thinking of…something else…

Yes!

nerdfighterrrrr! DFTBA, my friend. DFTBA.

Is he still your favourite person on the Interwebs?

Liam Hanson I thought my phone was glitching our lmao

My... Head... Can't... Think...

Lets just use infinity factorial

I think it was Max Planck, the founder of quantum physics

that sounds right

Okay, why?

It was whenever he said 'the edge'.

Hoshimaru57 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Edge

Its a picture of The Edge from U2.

just put your speed at .25

Why do you say 0.999... < 1? What reasons do you have to believe that statement?

Basic math. Although the difference between these sums is miniscule, 1-0.999...=/=0.

Mike D Generally, when this question comes up, people are asking about it in the real number system. In the real number system, there are no infinitesimals. This means that if the difference between two real numbers is smaller than any positive real number, then it is actually 0. This is a strange truth for many people, but it is actually the truth of the real number system.

Yea, but because 0.999... repeats ad infinitum, isn't it an irrational number?

Mike D No, repeating decimals are always rational numbers. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_decimal

he also said that things slowed down because they got tired.

Wait. Really?

The Edge, the guitarist from U2.

What about 2016?

@@ebtihal1617 Yeah. I want to know too

That was The Edge, the guitarist of the band U2.

ok? XD

Wait, was that the guitarist’s nickname?

Your question got me interested, so I paused the video right before one of the flashes, and went frame by frame with the arrow keys and took a screenshot. It turns out that it's The Edge from U2. Here's the link to the screenshot I uploaded if you want to see it: postimg.org/image/8m9cdonk5/

Ausencio Flores Thank you for taking the time to do that really appreciate that.

Ausencio Flores hahhaha I had to do that too (because who wants to just submit to subliminal messaging) but I had no clue who that was, so now I get the joke. Thanks :)

Yeah, Crash Course is awesome!

What if I could hypothetically move faster than light?

Benjamin Tuesday Then you'll break physics when you reach the end. We don't have a clue what could be there, it is taken as impossible to, as inhabitants of this universe, determine what lies beyond it, and even if, it is doubtful we would be able to understand it.

No you were just turning 16. The late winter of your 1st year you were just born. So the late winter of your second year you were barely 1, and so on and so forth

Late winter isn't literal.

That's not a mispronunciation so much as it is a quirk of the English language, not unlike how, when confronted with a word beginning with an S followed by another consonant, Spanish-speakers involuntarily attach a short E sound to the beginning of the word. Or like how a Japanese person will involuntarily add the sound of U to the end of an English word that ends with the sound of a K. Because that sound is not present in the speaker's native tongue, it needs to be approximated.

cyanmanta I always thought that "sh" *is* present in English.

0.9.. is 1. There is no number between them. It is common knowledge among mathematicians.

0.9999999999999999 is less than 1 (note the lack of ellipses) 0.9999999999999999... (with ellipses) is equal to 1

Don't all countries do mathmatics this way? Not just Americans...

***** There was no bar above the number in the original comment.

TrueWOPR you are right about that is is smaller than 1 ...when you do little more advanced math you see the reason clearer..there is something called the limit of a function..that is (simplified) what function is limited by or simply leaning to.. lim(0.999999...) with n number of 9 when n is leaning to infinity is 1..but 0.9999... is not 1..math is strict..you can not write same number using the same base (10 for decimal..2 for binary) in two different ways (even if you put ... as symbol for infinity of 9-s).. 0.9999... is infinitly smaller than 1 ..but not 1...as there is no number infinity, but there is representation of a number leaning towards it..and "limited by it"..this is not as simple as it looks, math is not a proximation without specifically (limit) saying so...give math more credit then that ;) respect it for what it is.. PS: Fancy93pants same thing applies..you can not make that calculation without specifying that it is a limit..( I learned that same trick in school when I was young, but it is not really right way to do it..I remember having it as a question when I was younger on my city's math competition, with some other questions like proving 1+2+3...+n=n*(n+1)/2 , where correct proof needed is not what they where asking, it really is proven with mathematical induction which I learned later in life..)..so they might teach you in school "incorrect" math proofs as they do with many other classes..but for simplfication purposes only ofc..

.000...1 is an invalid concept, because that implies infinity has an end let's do this in base 12 1/3=.4 base 10 1/3=.333... base 12 3*1/3=3*.4=1 base 10 3*1/3=3*.33333=1

"(vi hart made a video on this that explains it better than I can because I wasn't trained in math or anything so)" The video you are referring to is an April Fool's joke video. Notice the date it was uploaded and how she basically says "April Fools" at the end.

it's interesting; I actually did notice the "april fools" at the end but I guess I interpreted it as "I'm saying april fools so other mathematicians don't kill me" anyway thank you for pointing that out to me

Lydia W I know a few people who have had that interpretation of the ending of the video. However, there were several videos she put out after that one (mainly her videos on infinities), where she brings up 0.999... = 1 again, even though it's only tangentially related. Also, the arguments in her 0.999... not equal to 1 video are all flawed (for example when she says you need to put a "2" on both sides). If you pay attention to her tone, you can probably pick up that she thinks most of the things she's saying in the April Fool's video are ridiculous.

MuffinsAPlenty oh okay

What mathematicians say that .333... is infinitesimally smaller than 1/3? 0.333... is exactly equal to 1/3 in the real number system. That is an indisputable fact. It has been proven. It is true. Done. If you want to go to another number system where repeating decimals are defined differently than they are in the real number system, then you could get a situation in which 0.333... is less than 1/3. But generally, that's not what we're referring to.

MuffinsAPlenty actually .3333 is just what we use to say 1/3. In reality it is infinitesimally smaller. Look up vi hart's video about .999 repeating (the sosond one) \

michael benzur Vi Hart's second video is an April Fool's joke. Listen to the last 5 seconds. Moreover, her second video is intentionally riddled with mathematical errors. Despite seeing proof, a lot of people refuse to believe that 0.999... = 1. Many of them even come up with "reasons" why the proofs don't work. Of course, the reasons are incorrect since the proofs _do_ work. Basically, Vi Hart's second video is pretty much poking fun of the arguments that people come up with to say that 0.999... isn't 1 by showcasing them in that video. Listen to the tone of her voice. You can tell that she is completely baffled by the "logic" in what she's saying.

MuffinsAPlenty lol how late was it when i watched that one

MuffinsAPlenty ok u win. i didt even notice it was called why egery proof is wrong

acenog123 Not all Ahadeeth (the plural of Hadith) are, well, 'created equal'. Ahadeeth were compiled into books a while after the prophet's death, so sourcing them was a real issue. You needed *impeccable* sources to make sure your Hadith was credible. (Also it needed to make sense, but this isn't really relevant here). So, naturally, different Ahadith are ascribed different levels of credibility. So, things like praying 5 times a day are indisputable, because they are very well sourced. 72 virgins, on the other hand, is.... Iffy, to say the least. What John says is right, the sourcing was terrible and the standards for this sourcing were very high. I don't think that Hadith even made it to a more credible book of Ahadith. So, yes, Ahadith are trusted sources of knowledge and lifestyle, but not all of them. Hope this helps! :) Sorry for the long lecture XD

+h4x0rmynob The list of cooler words is likely a short one!

because infinity is weird. Like where would you put the hypothetical .00000000000000000...1 at the end to set .9 repeating to one?

Once you've defined exactly what you mean by 0.999..., the result follows by recognising it as a geometric series.

No, it occurs every time he says the word "edge".

If you use 0.25 speed you can see a picture of some guy

+Brent Kramer: For what value of x is y = 0.999...? Edit: Also, your example isn't quite right. You have y = 1/x. This function takes on the value of 1 at x = 1. Maybe you're referring to the fact that as x is allowed to get arbitrarily large, y tends toward 0. But this doesn't seem to be the point you're trying to make.

Which discrete value of 0.999... are you looking for?(I did misspeak slightly here) irt the edit: Yes, I was paying more attention to it's limit to 0, I was groggy when I made the comment. y=-(1/x)+1 with a domain of 0 < X < ∞ would be a better example.

Brent Kramer 0.999... has only one value. There is only one 0.999... For a function like y = -(1/x)+1, I claim that there is no value of x for which y = 0.999...

If you approach it from a mathematical perspective and think there is only one value for 0.999... then x=infinity for the equation I corrected. If you approach it from a scientific/real world perspective then your approximation for 0.999 is limited by your precision and can be a real number.

+Brent Kramer Let's say x = 0.9999999..... 100x = 99.999999........ 99x = 100x - x = 99.99999...... - 0.999999....... = 99 x = 99/99 = 1 you might argue that the number is missing 2 "last" number 9, but that's the thing, infinite has no "last" btw, look it up on wikipedia i think i saw the article some years ago