proof that 1=2
-
- Regular Member
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: December 31st, 2005, 5:54 pm
- Location: Burlington + Grimsby, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
proof that 1=2
a = b
a^2 = a*b
a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
(a+b) = b
a+a = a
2a = a
2 = 1
id like to see you figgure that one out
Bochek
a^2 = a*b
a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
(a+b) = b
a+a = a
2a = a
2 = 1
id like to see you figgure that one out
Bochek
Adam Bochek's 93 1.6L SOHC http://www.bochek.ca/car.gif
-
- Regular Member
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: December 31st, 2005, 5:54 pm
- Location: Burlington + Grimsby, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
just dont give it away for thoes who cant get it.Custommx3 wrote:LOL man thats old!
Bochek
Adam Bochek's 93 1.6L SOHC http://www.bochek.ca/car.gif
Good to see this old thing still making rounds - we used to do things like this in the 8th grade i think.
Another really simple one
(x-a)(x-b).......(x-z) = 0
Another really simple one
(x-a)(x-b).......(x-z) = 0
94 Mx-3 Precidia
1.8L 4Cyl DOHC newGen BP (used to be B6DE) ATX
http://www.mx-3.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=54032
http://www.cardomain.com/id/ariesdude
1.8L 4Cyl DOHC newGen BP (used to be B6DE) ATX
http://www.mx-3.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=54032
http://www.cardomain.com/id/ariesdude
- Nd4SpdSe
- Senior Member
- Posts: 11212
- Joined: May 25th, 2002, 2:01 am
- Location: Québec City, Quebec, Canada
- Contact:
Re: proof that 1=2
Wouldn't it be proof that 2=1 (I'm more than one way
)
I don't know if there's some hidden message that your Implying (that I'm not seeing), but for the math, it's been many years since I've worked with it, it basically all makes sence, except for this part:
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
I don't know if there's some hidden message that your Implying (that I'm not seeing), but for the math, it's been many years since I've worked with it, it basically all makes sence, except for this part:
Bochek wrote: a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
1992 Mazda Mx-3 GSR - 2.5L KLZE : Award Winning Show Car & Race Car ['02-'09] (Retired)
2004 Mazda RX-8 GT - Renesis Wankel : LS3 Coils, BHR Mid-Pipe + Falken RT-615K 245/40r18
2011 Mazda Mazda2 GS - 1.5L Manual : Yozora Edition (1 of 500)
2003 Nissan Xterra SE - 4x4 Supercharged : 2" Body Lift, 4" Suspension Lift & 33" MTR Kevlar
2001 Nissan Frontier SE - The Frontrailer : Expedition/Off-Road Trailer Project
2004 Mazda RX-8 GT - Renesis Wankel : LS3 Coils, BHR Mid-Pipe + Falken RT-615K 245/40r18
2011 Mazda Mazda2 GS - 1.5L Manual : Yozora Edition (1 of 500)
2003 Nissan Xterra SE - 4x4 Supercharged : 2" Body Lift, 4" Suspension Lift & 33" MTR Kevlar
2001 Nissan Frontier SE - The Frontrailer : Expedition/Off-Road Trailer Project
-
- Regular Member
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: December 31st, 2005, 5:54 pm
- Location: Burlington + Grimsby, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Re: proof that 1=2
no that still makes sence, remember A=B so if you assign a number to A, lets say 2 then A and B = 2Nd4SpdSe wrote:Wouldn't it be proof that 2=1 (I'm more than one way)
I don't know if there's some hidden message that your Implying (that I'm not seeing), but for the math, it's been many years since I've worked with it, it basically all makes sence, except for this part:Bochek wrote: a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
so then its just
2^2-2^2=2*2-2^2
witch is
4-4=4-4
wich is
0=0
wich is true.
Bochek
Adam Bochek's 93 1.6L SOHC http://www.bochek.ca/car.gif
it all works with subsitution of real numbers until you get to
a+b=b
because, if a=2 like you said, and a=b, then the equation is
2+2=2
4=2
2=0
same thing with a+a=a...then there is
2a=a
2(2)=2
4=2
2=0
so your actually proving that 2=zero, if infact a and b equal 2.
Therefore this formula proves that any given value that is subsituted into these equation will end up equal to zero. If 4=a and b, then 4=0. same with 5, 6,7,8,9, whatever.
Now, if your going by simply manipulating the variables, then lets turn b into a
then,
a = a
a^2 = a*a < - also known as a^2, so a^2=a^2
a^2-a^2 = a*a-a^2 <- also known as a^2-a^2=a^2-a^2 and finaly0a=0a
(a+a)(a-a) = a(a-a) <- (2a)(0)=a(0) which is again, 0+0
a+a = a <-2a = a or if you minute a from each side, then a=0
a is the variable, therefore anygiven variable=0
an you can't devide by a variable, that would be improper because you are remouving a variable.
FOol
a+b=b
because, if a=2 like you said, and a=b, then the equation is
2+2=2
4=2
2=0
same thing with a+a=a...then there is
2a=a
2(2)=2
4=2
2=0
so your actually proving that 2=zero, if infact a and b equal 2.
Therefore this formula proves that any given value that is subsituted into these equation will end up equal to zero. If 4=a and b, then 4=0. same with 5, 6,7,8,9, whatever.
Now, if your going by simply manipulating the variables, then lets turn b into a
then,
a = a
a^2 = a*a < - also known as a^2, so a^2=a^2
a^2-a^2 = a*a-a^2 <- also known as a^2-a^2=a^2-a^2 and finaly0a=0a
(a+a)(a-a) = a(a-a) <- (2a)(0)=a(0) which is again, 0+0
a+a = a <-2a = a or if you minute a from each side, then a=0
a is the variable, therefore anygiven variable=0
an you can't devide by a variable, that would be improper because you are remouving a variable.
FOol
- mr1in6billion
- Supporting Member
- Posts: 961
- Joined: August 28th, 2005, 9:06 pm
- Location: Fog City
ummm.. your on the right track for all the wrong reasons.Vanished wrote: so your actually proving that 2=zero, if infact a and b equal 2.
Therefore this formula proves that any given value that is subsituted into these equation will end up equal to zero. If 4=a and b, then 4=0. same with 5, 6,7,8,9, whatever.
Now, if your going by simply manipulating the variables, then lets turn b into a
then,
a = a
a^2 = a*a < - also known as a^2, so a^2=a^2
a^2-a^2 = a*a-a^2 <- also known as a^2-a^2=a^2-a^2 and finaly0a=0a
(a+a)(a-a) = a(a-a) <- (2a)(0)=a(0) which is again, 0+0
a+a = a <-2a = a or if you minute a from each side, then a=0
a is the variable, therefore anygiven variable=0
an you can't devide by a variable, that would be improper because you are remouving a variable.
FOol
if 4=2, then you know you have a false statement, and any result is invalid. You could argue (like you said):
4-2=2-2 leads to 2=0
but at the same time
4/2=2/2 which ends with 2=1, both of which are false.
Also, A is not neccicarily a variable. It is assumed to be an unknown constant, but even if it was a variable, there is no reason you can't divide by it. Division of variables is used all the time to reduce multivariable equations down to a single variable that can then be solved for.
-
- Regular Member
- Posts: 1704
- Joined: December 31st, 2005, 5:54 pm
- Location: Burlington + Grimsby, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
mr1in6billion wrote:ummm.. your on the right track for all the wrong reasons.Vanished wrote: so your actually proving that 2=zero, if infact a and b equal 2.
Therefore this formula proves that any given value that is subsituted into these equation will end up equal to zero. If 4=a and b, then 4=0. same with 5, 6,7,8,9, whatever.
Now, if your going by simply manipulating the variables, then lets turn b into a
then,
a = a
a^2 = a*a < - also known as a^2, so a^2=a^2
a^2-a^2 = a*a-a^2 <- also known as a^2-a^2=a^2-a^2 and finaly0a=0a
(a+a)(a-a) = a(a-a) <- (2a)(0)=a(0) which is again, 0+0
a+a = a <-2a = a or if you minute a from each side, then a=0
a is the variable, therefore anygiven variable=0
an you can't devide by a variable, that would be improper because you are remouving a variable.
FOol
if 4=2, then you know you have a false statement, and any result is invalid. You could argue (like you said):
4-2=2-2 leads to 2=0
but at the same time
4/2=2/2 which ends with 2=1, both of which are false.
Also, A is not neccicarily a variable. It is assumed to be an unknown constant, but even if it was a variable, there is no reason you can't divide by it. Division of variables is used all the time to reduce multivariable equations down to a single variable that can then be solved for.
Your on the right track with this idea.
Bochek
Adam Bochek's 93 1.6L SOHC http://www.bochek.ca/car.gif
- happyclown
- Regular Member
- Posts: 316
- Joined: July 18th, 2004, 2:01 am
- Location: Vermont
- Contact:
For this to work out - it should behappyclown wrote:This reminds me of the Women = Evil proof:
women = time + money
>since time is money
women = money^2
>since money is the root of all evil
women = sqrt(evil)^2
>sqrt() to the power of 2 cancles
Women = Evil
women = time * money
not
women = time + money
94 Mx-3 Precidia
1.8L 4Cyl DOHC newGen BP (used to be B6DE) ATX
http://www.mx-3.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=54032
http://www.cardomain.com/id/ariesdude
1.8L 4Cyl DOHC newGen BP (used to be B6DE) ATX
http://www.mx-3.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=54032
http://www.cardomain.com/id/ariesdude
- mr1in6billion
- Supporting Member
- Posts: 961
- Joined: August 28th, 2005, 9:06 pm
- Location: Fog City
- Custom_V6_Limited_SE
- Regular Member
- Posts: 508
- Joined: October 11th, 2005, 12:58 pm
- Location: Spring Hill, FL
Re: proof that 1=2
The problem comes when you devide both sides by (a-b); because, if a=b, then a-b=0. Thus, you are dividing both sides of the equation by zero which automatically makes the equation undefined.Bochek wrote:a = b
a^2 = a*b
a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
(a+b) = b
a+a = a
2a = a
2 = 1
id like to see you figgure that one out
Bochek
So, here is a better way of looking at it.
a = b
a^2 = a*b
a^2-b^2 = a*b-b^2
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
(a+b)(0) = b(0)
0 = 0
'93 MX-3 GS SE:My Mods