This number is indivisible by 3. You'll say yes it is, the result is 3.3recurring, however this is flawed. In the end this is a very imperfect solution to this problem. I believe there's something missing here in our mathematical perspective which doesn't allow us to realise that this is not true as how could possibly multiplying 3.3recurring possibly somehow magically cause a 0.1recurring to exist?
If you mock me I'll remind you that people didn't realise there was a 0 either so maybe there might be something mind blowingly simple we are missing here.
But what is the true solution? What do you think? are there any studies on this?
>however this is flawed. In the end this is a very imperfect solution to this problem explain
Brayden Barnes
I tried to in my post...
William Hill
3.333... is only a way to WRITE it. Not what it actually IS.
Kevin Ortiz
You're implying that 0.99... =/= 1, and we've been over why that's wrong many times.
Anthony Foster
>we are missing you are missing two things 1) the field of rational numbers 2) the concept of decimal approximations, or equivalently, convergent series
Christian Jenkins
10 is congruent with 1 (3)
Liam Clark
If you don't like writing 3.333..., just write it as 10/3. That's why I hate decimal representations.
Carson Mitchell
the geometry of the number system is beyond the feeble concept known as the 'decimal system'
T/3 in dozenal is 3.4 you can change the base of a number system and force sums to terminate, in many cases
Cameron Powell
10/3 = 10/3 That is a fraction, no decimals, no error. (10/3)*3 = 3
But that still converges to [math]0. \overline{3}[/math].
Nathaniel Sullivan
>I believe Stopped reading right there
Easton Martin
10/3
Sebastian Cox
>(10/3)*3 = 3
Camden Richardson
no it converges to 3.333...
Landon Scott
Even if you don't like the idea of 0.9999 == 1 you still get your solution by using fractions. 10/3 is perfectly good answer and 10/3 * 3 equals a perfect 10. no problem or mind blowing stuff here
Christian Garcia
I'd suggest you give the ternary numeral system a read
tldr every infinite decimal in binary is a finite decimal in ternary
I find this topic very interesting and I'm curious if I will live to see the era of ternary computers, which will surely come
Gabriel Barnes
Use a different base. I like base 12. Eliminates most of the problems with base 10. And yes, people much smarter than you have had problems with 3 repeating.
Eli Gray
Really makes you think
Austin Reed
what the fuck? that problem doesn't even make sense
Sebastian Rogers
Why?
to me it seems you need 2 A cabinets and 9 B cabinets to get 186 cubic feet space for the exact price of 600 and full 60 square feet coverage of the room. Any other A:B ratios seem to be inferior.
Brayden Robinson
maybe im retarded? How'd you find those constraints
William Perez
I don't see the problem. This system works perfectly fine. There is no need for such precision.
Elijah Gonzalez
Modern mathematics are yet not good enough to produce a result to the 10/3 operation.
It's kind of weird that IRL you can divide things in 3 parts equally from 10 units but can't do it on numbers.
Before the trolls show up:
3.33333...x3 = 9.999999...
10=9.99999.... + 0.0000000(...)1
So 10 difers from 9.99999...
PS: The only reason why we can't do it, it's because we have 10 numbers (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) and then regroup, if we'd have a system with, instead of 10 numbers, 3, or 6, or 9, etc. then we could divide 10/3 (which shouldnt be called "10" and "3" BUT we'd be able to do it IRL with tangible things, just grouping them together in, for example, "10s" made with 3 units, instead of "10" units.
Anthony Hughes
It's a Satanic conspiracy. Jews & Masons still use base 60 (the secret to their intelligence).
Evan Wright
9.9999... = 10 though this has already been settled
Noah Stewart
I just figured I can put together two inequations with two unknown variables. Ap * Ac + Bp * Bc
Christopher Morris
oh you're right man, I completely just missed the graphing part. Thanks, been a long day lol
Henry Bennett
10 divided by 3 is "3 and a bit"
3 bits = 1
it doesnt matter what these bits are or what value we assign them
so 3x(3 and a bit) = 3x3 + 3x(a bit) = 9 + 3 bits
and since 3 bits = 1
= 9+1 = 10
not hard tbfamqh
Jack Campbell
Op your statement is flawed 10/3=3.33 to infinity And To revert back to 10 you infer that 0.1 must magically appear This is not so. Actually the amount is so much smaller than 0.1 that it is in fact irrelevant. More along the lines of 0.000-to infinity-1 Or 1.0X10^-infinity
Ryan Torres
Also it is taught in elementary school that to end an infinite division problem there may be a remainder...just to keep things simple I guess
Christian Flores
10 divided by 3 is 10/3.
What's so hard to grasp?
Daniel Parker
>the result is 3.3recurring no my friend. the result is 10/3. After establishing this we can try to represent 10/3 in the decimal system.
