Design of artificial intelligence must read [1 paradox]Why 0.999... is not equal to 1?

Written in 2012

The current mathematic theory tells us, 1>0.9, 1>0.99, 1>0.999, ..., but at last it says 1=0.999..., a negation of itself (Proof 0.999... =1: 1/9=0.111..., 1/9x9=1, 0.111...x9=0.999..., so 1=0.999...). So it is totally a paradox, name it as 【1 paradox】. You see this is a mathematic problem at first, actually it is a philosophic problem. Then we can resolve it. Because math is a incomplete theory, only philosophy could be a complete one. The answer is that 0.999... is not equal to 1. Because of these reasons:

1. The infinite world and finite world.

We live in one world but made up of two parts: the infinite part and the finite part. But we develop our mathematic system based on the finite part, because we never entered into the infinite part. Your attention, God is in it.

0.999... is a number in the infinite world, but 1 is a number in the finite world. For example, 1 represents an apple. But then 0.999...? We don't know. That is to say, we can't use a number in the infinite world to plus a number in the finite world. For example, an apple plus an apple, we say it is 1+1=2, we get two apples, but if it is an apple plus a banana, we only can say we get two fruits. The key problem is we don't know what is 0.999..., we can get nothing. So we can't say 9+0.999...=9.999... or 10, etc.

We can use "infinite world" and "finite world" to resolve some of zeno's paradox, too.

2. lim0.999...=1, not 0.999...=1.

3.The indeterminate principle.

Because of the indeterminate principle, 1/9 is not equal to 0.111....

For example, cut an apple into nine equal parts, then every part of it is 1/9. But if you use different measure tools to measure the volume of every part, it is indeterminate. That is to say, you may find the volume could not exactly be 0.111..., but it would be 0.123, 0.1142, or 0.11425, etc.

Now we end a biggest mathematical crisis. But most important is this standpoint tells us, our world is only a sample from a sample space. When you realized this, and that the current probability theory is wrong, when you find the Meta-sample-space, you would be able to create a real AI-system. It will indicate that there must be one God-system in the system, which is the controller. Look our world, there must be one God, as for us, only some robots. Maybe we are in a God's game, WHO KNOWS?

相关阅读：

1、星际争霸1的AI设计思路：以人族开局为例

bbs.8da.com/?168461

2、诸神之战在星际争霸1的实现[001]AI游戏的发端

fitness.hk/viewthread.php?tid=12572&extra=page%3D1

3、绝对真理的内涵、架构与印证

forum.chinese-linguipedia.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=85517

4、概率论：完全可能性的理论与现实图景

b.gogo.la/thread-437414-1-2.html

5、悖论问题的统一解

cheshire.linkarena.com

6、从延安文艺座谈会到人类社会的未来

blog.chinaunix.net/uid/28557922.html

7、发现号航天飞机——自然算法伟大的飞矢变换

wizit.co.nz/cms/Forum/tabid/58/forumid/21/scope/threads/Default.aspx

8、千古同一梦，开门笑解痴——我的红楼梦

bbs.cssa.uiuc.edu/viewthread.php?tid=36448&extra=page%3D1More infos, download txt files from:

(1)speedyshare.com/DQz9y/AiforSC.rar

(2)filerio.in/kw4cl2l2y3qi

(3)8nlkzh.dl4free.com/en

(4)ge.tt/8M7YKlk/v/0

(5)freegigstorage.com/download.php?file=399AiforSC.rar

It's a limit. .999. . . approaches 1 but never gets there. In the real world round-off inevitably occurrs making .999. . . into 1. A few months ago someone posted the same thing here. Apparently the moderator thought it was so stupid he removed it. The only people who think it's meaningful are sitting around smoking pot and respond to it with "wow man, that's heavy".

message edited by DAVEINCAPS

A basic misunderstanding of mathematics and the real number system, I'm afraid. I've smoked my fair share of pot but even I don't think that it's heavy. More unbelievably lightweight. I'm not surprised if the mods deleted a previous thread on the topic. It's bad science, bad mathematics, bad philsophy, bad everything.

@DAVEINCAPS apparently you are not the first to suggest the heavy use, three other sites included above do the same.... On another note, all of those links are basically the same thread...why bother with all the work.

::mike

Yeah, since it had been posted here twice I figured it had made the rounds. I googled part of the text and got a few thiousand hits.

ijack -

bad mathematics, bad philsophy, bad everything.Dave -

part of the text and got a few thiousand hits.Por spellin!

3/10 - see me!

Regards - Mike :-)

That's what comes of using a damned iPad!

Yeah, I don't know, maybe my fingers are getting fat. It seems I keep hitting the 'i' key unintentionally. Most of my edits are for fixing that.

Ask Your Question

Weekly Poll