A couple of days ago I stumbled on this page - 6 innocent sounding topics that are guaranteed to start a flame war.

Now a few of them I can understand strongly differing opinions, but the one that really threw me was:

Is 0.9' (i.e. 0.9 recurring) equal to 1.

Firstly, it's hard to imagine how it cropped up naturally in conversation, but, secondly, it's even hard to see how anybody who has a strong enough opinion to post about it doesn't know the correct answer.

So, in the interest of scientific enterprise, I thought I'd use FCCUK as a flaming litmus (which sounds like a cocktail served in the gay bars of the American South) to see if people really did have strong opinions on this.

If you really must know, here's my reckoning:

mmm so you've just proved algebra is a sham and doesn't work...

As well as proving minesweeper should be installed on all PC's and should be unable to be removed

How about that old favourite, common sense...

1/3 = 0.3'

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

0.3' + 0.3' + 0.3' = 0.9'

Hitler.

Well, I do like dogs and support the unification of Germany, so that's fair.

While the maths nerds are here, somebody just asked me how long it would take to do this in Excel.

I don't think he wants to wait 3 years while I do a maths degree.

I think the answer is 42.

I follow your reckoning on the theory that 0.9' = 1 up until the final line where it at falls over.

0.9' does equal 1 if you are happy to accept that any number less than an infinite number of decimal places is an approximation. But even with an infinite number of decimal places, 0.9' doesn't quite equal 1, because you can take it to an infinite number of places + 1. Oh damn, think I just disproved my own argument...

Corrected to best reflect Der Fúhrers ambitions. He was big into holiday camps as well.

I would imagine as an Art student he was pretty crap at maths.

Linda McCartney.

This is a list of famous vegetarians, right?

9x = 9 isn't the correct response to 10x - x. It's very close but is out by 1/e^infinity
Infinity is not a number.

You could say that 1/infinity = 0. but that is also a problem, because if you divide 1 into infinite pieces and they end up with 0 in each, what happened to the 1?

In fact 1/infinity is known as undefined - i think

It's known as one-slash-ampersand-hash-eight-seven-three-four

Oh no it's not - 9.9' - 0.9' == 9, it's not out by any fraction at all.

Even if it were, that wouldn't explain why 3(0.3')=1

1/3 = 0.33333333r. Your assertion that 1/3 = 0.3 is erroneous. Did you study art, Andrew?

Ergo 3 x 0.3 cannot = 1. Unfortunately 3 x a decimal 1/3 (0.33333333r) will never equal 1 either .

I'm siding towards the unsuitabilty of algebra to deal with numbers that require an infinite amount of digits to be exact. Therefore 0.9' <>1.

Of course getting back to the 1/0 discussion, if there's an infinite number of planets in the universe but only some of them are populated the average number of people per planet in the universe is therefore zero. From this, people don't actually exist and anyone you meet is merely a figment of your imagination.

They probably have imaginary legs, then, since the average number of legs a person has is somewhat less than two...

But there isn't an infinate number of planets, as the part of the universe that contains matter has an outer edge.

It would be good to philosphise an infinite number of plants with finite living organisms meaning all plants have less than a whole person but alas the earth has it's fair share so I guess it's a bit of a non starter.

I didn't say that 1/3 = 0.3, I said it equalled 0.3' (note the little recurring symbol there)

And, no, I didn't study art. If you'd seen my art you'd know why

I seem to recall that Douglas Adams did something similar in HHGTTG.

Googling "Drake equation" may also be of interest to you.

I do apologise Andrew, I missed the ' symbol. I apologise even more for falsely accusing you of being arty.. :)*

* Disclaimer - This should not be read as inferring that an Art degree is in any way inferior to a proper degree.

Though of course it is...

Anyone undecided about this proposition is welcome to discuss it with MrsC (Masters in Fine Art). But I don't think I'll watch.

Hmmm... I did film school which is combo of art and science. So considering the equations above does that make me both or none or half? The again, seeing I probably WAS 0.5 of each to start with and I improved in both of these aspects, does that mean I'm now something like 0.8 + 0.9 = 1.7?

It's OK. At least it's not Psychology.

Or philosophy <scoff>

Corrected that for you.

Where's MrsC? followed by

Infer?

Imply.

In the manner of an imp?

A Lincoln phrase, I believe. Like "whereupon", that's another.