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…, 1/9×9=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?
I wanted to send a quick intro as I joined the web payments group today. My former work experience includes WIRED, TripAdvisor and most recently Google. I’m currently based in NYC and manage a BD team at Applico, a top US mobile solutions company. We specialize in strategy, design and development across all mobile platforms and connected devices.
My focus spans across the mobile payments, entertainment, and healthcare spaces. I look forward to contributing to the group and helping scope the future of web/mobile payments with our community.
I have developed several wordpress websites for my company and would like to know if there is a wordpress theme that allows the designer to box out the sidebars on each side of the theme. My boss does not like all the white space on my site.
Would there any interest in joining a
group the aim of would be the development
of an “upper rule-set”, having the same
relationship to rule-sets (such as those of
RIF) as upper-ontologies (such as “OpenCyc”
and the like) have with ontologies
The purpose of this post is to gauge how much interest
there might be in joining a group whose purpose is to
develop standards related to “strong” AI (Artificial
Intelligence), where the the word “strong”, here, refers
to the direct simulation, preferably using existing
Semantic Web technologies (such as OWL, RIF etc.), of
human cognitive functions, such as perception, learning,
memory, judgement and decision-making (amongst others)
Please indicate your interest in the form of a comment
I have a website which has got around 1000 pages. I declared all html doctype to use XHTML 1.0 strict
I checked the website pages using W3C markup validation tool, I got 320 errors, Then I changed the doctype to HTML 4.0 the errors reduced to 300.
Then I used the HTML5 doctype, Then errors got reduced to 75. So How these errors got reduced by just changing the doctype.
My Question is:
1) Validating my pages against XHTML1.0 standards gives me more than 300 errors, Which is quite huge and bit difficult to resolve them.
2) Validating my pages against HTML5 standards gives me around 70 errors, Which is not a issue and can resolve them easily.
So In this case which HTML version i have to use so that It does not affects SEO of the pages, Because w3c validation also affects the SEO
If i just use HTML5 doctype but not exactly the page structure (nav, header, section, footer, article ….), Will this really matters Because I have got around 1000 pages which is very difficult make them to follow the HTML5 page structure.
What i am thinking is to reduce the errors in w3c, I will just change the doctype to HTML5 and resolve the w3c errors. Is this a good idea. Or If any please suggest me.
As we all know, HTML5 is in huge demand and is being implemented in every other website and we all are loving HTML 5 concepts, features and flexibility. But the challenge for validating these website susing W3c validator is still a challenge, specially when clients specially asked for 100% W3C validated websites.
Whenever they run a SEO audit tool, a red warning appears with validation issues, and thats a big problem. Its not an easy task to convince our clients about the Experimental Features. Obviously no everyone is technical enough to understand this.
What do you guys think about it? Have you found any way to get away with those Meta error conformance?
I would love to hear your comments. If you want to contact me for further discussion please post your comments here. I am a web developer and looking forward to your suggestions.
I’d like to propose a new group for a new standard: The Remote DOM.
Apple has AirPlay, Google (technically: The WiFi Alliance) has Miracast – the web has none of that.
The possibility to have a second screen opens up interesting possibilities – for instance displaying a presentation on a beamer or a big screen or working with your mobile device, like you would normally work with your PC or laptop.
Smartphones and Tablets are getting more and more powerful, the PC is deemed dead – using a bluetooth keyboard / mouse and a big screen, one can replace her workstation with a simple tablet or smartphone.
This makes it interesting for web apps, such as email, document editors, cloud development environments (e.g. Cloud9 IDE) to leverage external screens.
Similarly to how the Shadow DOM paved the way for custom elements using web technologies, a “Remote DOM” could allow display of portions of the web app to be displayed on “remote” (i.e. “external”) devices, such as screens, Smart TVs, etc.
Hi Community and Business Group participants! W3C announced that we are conducting a survey through 5 May 2013 about the W3C brand. Please take a moment to share your views on who W3C is to you and who we should be. Your responses will help guide where we direct our energies as we evolve the W3C brand. Participants who complete the survey may enter to win an Apple iPad mini. See the original announcement for more information.
Thanks!
This forum is historical. From 2011 to 2015 this Community Forum was used for discussion about potential groups. It was closed because most discussion in practice takes place on the main Community Group blog. Learn more.
