A Childs Mind Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 i keep seeing this problem and i dont see how it posible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 It's not. It's usually a "proof" involving division by zero, or some such nonsense... And I'm not sure this is the right section for this, although I'll leave that to the mods 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Or for extremely large values of 2, and bad communication. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMoosie Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Don't be biased; it could also be a very small value of 5, and bad interpretation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samtheflash82 Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 there is a fallacy in that equation. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedfor some reason the picture didnt show up so here is a link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kroughfire Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 The versin of the proof that I've always seen was 1=2, but I'm sure it could be rigged up for 2 + 2 = 5 1=1 -1=-1 -1/1 = 1/-1 root both sides i/1 = 1/i add 3/2i to both sides 3/2i + 1/i = i/1 + 3/2i multiply both sides by i 3/2 + 1 = -1 + 3/2 2.5 = .5 Ok. so it didn't equil 1=2, but its the principle of the thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triclino Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 The versin of the proof that I've always seen was 1=2, but I'm sure it could be rigged up for 2 + 2 = 5 1=1 -1=-1 -1/1 = 1/-1 root both sides i/1 = 1/i add 3/2i to both sides 3/2i + 1/i = i/1 + 3/2i multiply both sides by i 3/2 + 1 = -1 + 3/2 2.5 = .5 Ok. so it didn't equil 1=2, but its the principle of the thing... obviously when you root both sides the result is not :i/1 =1/i ,because : i/1 =1/i <=====> [math] i^2 = 1\Longleftrightarrow -1 = 1[/math] Now the statement, -1 =1 in any line in any proof can result in any conclusion right or wrong For example can result to false statements ,like: 5=7 ,1>4 , [math] x^2<0[/math] ln(-2) = 0 e,t,c ,e,t,c in the following way: -1 =1 [math]\Longrightarrow [(-1 =1 )[/math]or [math](x^2<0)]\Longleftrightarrow[(-1\neq 1)\Longrightarrow (x^2<0)][/math] and since [math] -1\neq 1[/math] we conclude that: [math] x^2<0[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onequestion Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8 2.4 ≈ 2 4.8 ≈ 5 2 + 2 = 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 onequestion: that's called rounding error for a reason. what you should have said for the last line is 2 + 2 ≈ 5 which basically means it doesn't equal 5 but its close enough if your tolerance for error is large enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onequestion Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 yes lol i know i realized that obviously its just i didn't want other people to notice since the question originally said "=" not "≈" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samtheflash82 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Or you could simply love Big Brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan2here Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) A lookup post could help maybe not this one but a lot of thease sorts of things. I'm thinking aloud here. ([math]\neq[/math] 0)/0 = infinite = inf (>0)/0 = inf positively large (<0)/0 = inf negitively large 0/0 = undefined inf (- or /) inf = undefined inf positively large (+ or *) inf positively large = inf positively large inf negitively large - inf negitively large = inf negitively large inf (+ or -) finite = inf undefined (operator or function) anything generally = undefined undefined * 0 = 0 undefined ^ 1 = 1 or -1 anything \ self = 1 Maybe this table is going to get too big. inf = undefined in a way. It's either a range or a set of two ranges. sorry, got a bit off topic. Edited December 24, 2009 by alan2here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake.com Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 my teacher showed a way of doing this, using rounding 2+2=5 2.4+2.4= 4.8 round it up and down 2+2=5 2.4 is rounded down to 2 and 4.8 is rounded up to 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 There are two methods to prove 2 + 2 = 5 The Orwellian Method The Radiohead Method Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) It's also a joke. 2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2... =Uncool- Edited December 26, 2009 by uncool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeedfulThings Posted December 26, 2009 Share Posted December 26, 2009 Or you could simply love Big Brother. Yeah, I was wondering if I was the only one having a 1984 flashback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaled Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 if numbers would be real, 2.x + 2.x = 5.xx 2 + 2 ≈ 5 or if numbers have powers, 2^x + 2^y = 5 ..ex: 2^0 + 2^2 = 5 or that it is a false degoma, 2 + 2 = 5 (FALSE) ..etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanabe Posted May 21, 2010 Share Posted May 21, 2010 If in the case 2=2.5 2+2=5 <=> 2.5+2.5=5 Or quite simply the meaning of those numbers is different than what we are used to. So the symbol 2 does not mean two, nor does the symbol 5 mean five. It could also be that the person is using some sort of other numbering system like binary or hex, simply a different base than 10 that we are used to and did not communicate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now