Mickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 4 days agoKid gave a reasonable answer without all the math bullshitlemmy.worldimagemessage-square283fedilinkarrow-up11.02Karrow-down131
arrow-up1986arrow-down1imageKid gave a reasonable answer without all the math bullshitlemmy.worldMickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 4 days agomessage-square283fedilink
minus-squareKnock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 days ago3 times 0.333 is 0.999 not 1. Saying it equals 1 may be a common engineering convention, but it is mathematically incorrect. There is no failure of notation if fractions are used, which is why I gave this example of usefulness.
minus-squareJamablaya@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 day agoYou knows when a person informs you of a convention people use to solve a problem created by notation, you could just fucking learn instead of arguing stupidity.
minus-squareKnock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·edit-21 day agoYour chosen notation solves nothing. Try Representing 3227/555 using 4 trailing dots. I started here by showing how fractions are useful. You are the ignorant aggressor, trying to fight centuries of mathematicians by claiming decimals are always better.
3 times 0.333 is 0.999 not 1.
Saying it equals 1 may be a common engineering convention, but it is mathematically incorrect.
There is no failure of notation if fractions are used, which is why I gave this example of usefulness.
You knows when a person informs you of a convention people use to solve a problem created by notation, you could just fucking learn instead of arguing stupidity.
Your chosen notation solves nothing. Try Representing 3227/555 using 4 trailing dots.
I started here by showing how fractions are useful.
You are the ignorant aggressor, trying to fight centuries of mathematicians by claiming decimals are always better.