1+1 =/= 2 (or 2+2=/=4, can't remember which, maybe both).

Legend has it (or, I remember reading that) it's not the case that 1+1=2 (or 2+2=4). And that there's a massive book of equations to show this. IF anyone has nay idea that I'm talking about, please could they tell me what the 'theory' (or 'proof') is called? I dont need to understand it, but I do need it for my (final! :woo:

) university essay.

Thanks for any and all help :smile:

.

Edit: I'm getting a lot of unhelpful replies, I just want the name of the thoery if that's possible, rather than being told "that's wrong" "the definition of these numbers is", and if at all possible an academic source for it. Thanks for any help :smile:

.

Edit: After a range of replies after my first edit (and as I made my first edit, someone has manage to get what I'm talking about. I didn't know maths worked in a certain manner, so I was unable to accuratly say what I was talking about, and thought I'd have to make an argument a lot more indirectly that it looks like I will have to.

This post has exactly what I needed, but I really appreciate all replies that were intended to be useful :smile:

Thanks TSR :smile:

.

Useful post in summing up what I wanted to know:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=31494007&postcount=36

Sorry for all the confusion.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 1

Josh_Dey

16

||+|| = ||||
or
2+2 = 4

simple.

Reply 2

TSR George

OP

17

Original post by Josh_Dey

||+|| = ||||
or
2+2 = 4

simple.

Yes, intutively I would agree that's the case. There is a theory, or mathmatical proof, I'm unsure which, that states despite our intutions, this is not the case. I'm trying to find out the name of that theory.

Reply 3

Freerider101

12

Make your mind up!!

The proofs always have flaws such as dividing by 0 which is obviously undefined.

Reply 4

Occlusal

10

1+1=2 and 2+2=4. In fact, the definition of 2 is 1+1 and the definition of 4 is 1+1+1+1.

Is this book you are talking about "principia mathematica" by any chance?

Reply 5

Swayum

18

There's a very long proof explaining why 1 + 1 = 2, but obviously 1 +1 = 2 and 2 + 2 = 4 are true. There's no way to disprove it using our axioms because... it's already proven to be true.

Reply 6

wanderlust.xx

18

I'm sure that these so called proofs were proven to exploit some sort series convergence or something or other. Essentially most of them exploit some sort of advanced mathematics that the majority of A level students won't understand just yet.

Additionally, it's just not true. 1+1=2 is an axiom. It's... not wrong. =/

Reply 7

z0tx

12

Legend? Maths? Same sentence?

...

Reply 8

01010000 01001010

11

Interestingly, 0.999... does in fact equal 1.

Reply 9

Haddock3

You're looking for Spence's Theory:

Summarised in one sentence:

"Trolls can't add."

Reply 10

ilyking

it's called the theory of bull**** :biggrin:

Reply 11

Slumpy

16

As far as I'm aware, there is no such theory. There was the attempt to provide all of maths with a solid base(as swayum described), which was foiled a touch by Godel, if that's what you mean?

Reply 12

Stratos

15

Original post by Swayum

There's a very long proof explaining why 1 + 1 = 2, but obviously 1 +1 = 2 and 2 + 2 = 4 are true. There's no way to disprove it using our axioms because... it's already proven to be true.

Perhaps we shall overcome these axioms, for the sake of progress!

yes I'm being overly ambitious...

Here's an interesting link proving 1+1=1

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 13

username533239

17

Original post by Freerider101

Make your mind up!!

The proofs always have flaws such as dividing by 0 which is obviously undefined.

like on a calculator any number to power of 0=1

Reply 14

TSR George

OP

17

Original post by Swayum

There's a very long proof explaining why 1 + 1 = 2, but obviously 1 +1 = 2 and 2 + 2 = 4 are true. There's no way to disprove it using our axioms because... it's already proven to be true.

Ah, do you know what the long proof is called or where I can find it?

Reply 15

username533239

17

is this what you was on about?

edit, upon extra reading, i think it is

Reply 16

Bobifier

13

The closest you will come is by fixing a=b, algebraing a bit and eventuallly dividing by a-b, which is clearly 0 but you're not supposed to notice that because of the jigger pokery in the middle.

Reply 17

JordanR

12

Pretty sure you can do this just by manipulating the distributive property.

or, something I drew up:

http://www2.picturepush.com/photo/a/5396325/1024/Picture-Box/2%3D1.png

Original post by 01010000 01001010

Interestingly, 0.999... does in fact equal 1.

0.9999=x
9.999=10x
9=9x
x=1

:smile:

Original post by Swayum

There's a very long proof explaining why 1 + 1 = 2, but obviously 1 +1 = 2 and 2 + 2 = 4 are true. There's no way to disprove it using our axioms because... it's already proven to be true.

This is right

Original post by wanderlust.xx

I'm sure that these so called proofs were proven to exploit some sort series convergence or something or other. Essentially most of them exploit some sort of advanced mathematics that the majority of A level students won't understand just yet.

Additionally, it's just not true. 1+1=2 is an axiom. It's... not wrong. =/

It isn't an axiom. See above. Bertrand Russell etc

Original post by 01010000 01001010

Interestingly, 0.999... does in fact equal 1.

Best avatar on TSR

1+1 =/= 2 (or 2+2=/=4, can't remember which, maybe both).

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you