Post History
#6: Post edited
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-11T12:01:12Z (over 1 year ago)
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
This is incorrect. Given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units. In fact, given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article or [this](https://youtu.be/2EGO6przl1k) YouTube video.- Your confusion essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units. In fact, given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article or [this](https://youtu.be/2EGO6przl1k) YouTube video. See also [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2) Wikipedia article on $\sqrt{2}$; one can even get a line segment with the length of an irrational number!
- Your confusion essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
#5: Post edited
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-10T11:39:12Z (over 1 year ago)
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.- Your confusion essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units. In fact, given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article or [this](https://youtu.be/2EGO6przl1k) YouTube video.
- Your confusion essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
#4: Post edited
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-10T11:36:10Z (over 1 year ago)
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
- Your confusion essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
#3: Post edited
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-09T20:57:47Z (over 1 year ago)
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while one the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
- Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while on the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
#2: Post edited
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-09T20:56:59Z (over 1 year ago)
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
**No**, this is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.- Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while one the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
- > ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
- This is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
- Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while one the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.
#1: Initial revision
by
Snoopy
·
2022-10-09T20:56:18Z (over 1 year ago)
> ... it's impossible to measure and cut anything physical at a repetend.
**No**, this is incorrect. Given any line segment, there are many ways to _trisect_ it. See for instance [this](http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emt668/EMAT6680.2000/Lehman/emat6690/trisecttri's/triseg.html) article. In other words, given a segment with $1$ unit length, one can easily construct, "physically", a segment with a length of $1/3$ units.
Your question essentially boils down to why $0.\overline{9}=1$. Notice that on the right you have the integer $1$, while one the left, you have a repeating decimal which continues infinitely.