wolfgang Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 I can prove 1 = 2 !! or 0= 1,, or 3 = 7 and so on....i. e. x = y( where x and y are normally not equall ). mathmatically and without breaking any mathmatical roles ! can you ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 Let x=y. Then x^2=xy. Then x^2+x^2=x^2+xy. Then 2x^2=x^2+xy. Then 2x^2-2xy=x^2+xy-2xy. And then 2x^2-2xy=x^2-xy. You can re-write that last step as 2(x^2-xy)=1(x^2-xy). After you cancel the (x^2-xy)'s you get 2=1. Easy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 wolfgang Posted October 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 Let x=y. Then x^2=xy. Then x^2+x^2=x^2+xy. Then 2x^2=x^2+xy. Then 2x^2-2xy=x^2+xy-2xy. And then 2x^2-2xy=x^2-xy. You can re-write that last step as 2(x^2-xy)=1(x^2-xy). After you cancel the (x^2-xy)'s you get 2=1. Easy! but x^2-xy = 0 and u can`t cancel it (devide on 0). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 but x^2-xy = 0 and u can`t cancel it (devide on 0). But I didnt subtract the xy from both sides, i added a x^2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 But I didnt subtract the xy from both sides, i added a x^2. Your last step you said cancel (x^2-xy). How do you do that? You divide both sides by (x^2-xy). But since x^2-xy = 0 you can't divide by x^2-xy. So you can't cancel. Otherwise I could say simply well 1*0=2*0. Therefore 1=2. I wouldn't need to go through the manipulations you used. But 1*0=2*0 does not imply that 1=2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 No I can't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 No I can't... Haha then did i do all that math for no reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 wolfgang Posted October 27, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 Your last step you said cancel (x^2-xy). How do you do that? You divide both sides by (x^2-xy). But since x^2-xy = 0 you can't divide by x^2-xy. So you can't cancel. Otherwise I could say simply well 1*0=2*0. Therefore 1=2. I wouldn't need to go through the manipulations you used. But 1*0=2*0 does not imply that 1=2. thank you Maurice ..! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 wolfgang Posted October 27, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 No I can't... you are very intelligent !!...ty again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 araver Posted October 27, 2010 Report Share Posted October 27, 2010 x=y (mod g.c.d.(x,y)) or simpler x=y (mod 1) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 ln(2) = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 - 1/4 + 1/5 - 1/6 + 1/7 - 1/8 + 1/9 - 1/10 + ... 2 * ln(2) = 2 - 2/2 + 2/3 - 2/4 + 2/5 - 2/6 + 2/7 - 2/8 + 2/9 - 2/10 + ... 2 * ln(2) = 2 - 1 + 2/3 - 1/2 + 2/5 - 1/3 + 2/7 - 1/4 + 2/9 - 1/5 + ... 2 * ln(2) = 2 - 1 - 1/2 + 2/3 - 1/3 - 1/4 + 2/5 - 1/5 - 1/6 + 2/7 -1/7 + ... 2 * ln(2) = (2 - 1) - 1/2 + (2/3 - 1/3) - 1/4 + (2/5 - 1/5) -1/6 + (2/7 -1/7) - ... 2 * ln(2) = 1 - 1/2 + 1/3 - 1/4 + 1/5 - 1/6 + 1/7 - ... 2 * ln(2) = ln(2) 2 = 1 q.e.d. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 wolfgang Posted October 29, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2010 x=y (mod g.c.d.(x,y)) or simpler x=y (mod 1) The sentence x = y (mod n) means that n is a divisor of x - y. This sentence is read, "x is congruent to y modulo n." It is something like a remainder, because if you subtract a remainder from the dividend, the divisor will go into the result evenly. try again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 wolfgang Posted October 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2010 (edited) Hi friends.... do you know that (1)exponent(0) =1 and (1)exponent(1) =1 so.... 1 exponent 0=1exponent 1 There is a rule that says:if the bases are the same, then the exponents must be the same also, thus.. 0=1 or 1=2 Edited October 31, 2010 by wolfgang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted November 1, 2010 Report Share Posted November 1, 2010 Hi friends.... do you know that (1)exponent(0) =1 and (1)exponent(1) =1 so.... 1 exponent 0=1exponent 1 There is a rule that says:if the bases are the same, then the exponents must be the same also, thus.. 0=1 or 1=2 1^m=1^n does not imply that m = n since the rule you are using does not apply when 1 is the base because ln(1)=0. So what you are really saying is 1^m = 1^n => ln(1^m) = ln(1^n) => m*ln(1) = n*ln(1) => m = n. Of course the last implication is false because as stated earlier in this thread you cannot divide by 0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
wolfgang
I can prove
1 = 2 !! or 0= 1,, or 3 = 7 and so on....i. e. x = y( where x and y are normally not equall ).
mathmatically and without breaking any mathmatical roles !
can you ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
13 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.