why does 1+1 equal 2 ??

Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

Small123

england_sucks

dudes you're all wrong according to the computer
1+1=10

Your computer responds in binary?

Reply 21

england_sucks

Small123

Your computer responds in binary?

all computers respond in binary.It's just interpreted by the moniter as 2.

EDIT: or the graphics card or whatever.

It just does. :lol:

IF you've one eye ball and another eye ball you will have a total of 2 eye balls
GOT IT!

Reply 24

majikthise

Small123

I disagree. A computer can do everything in maths A Level. Computers can't do proofs, they lack the flair and the originality.

They may lack flair and originality, but they can still do proofs.

Reply 25

CHEM1STRY

It's a tautology, it just makes common sense. One thing plus another of the same thing makes two of these things. It is a fact, like A = A. Whether man observes it or not, whether he gives the amount represented by '1' the symbol 1 and the same for 2, the truth is there. It is certain.

Reply 26

makhani

because your mum said...

Reply 27

adamrules247

WTF are you on about. 1 + 1 equals a window. I thought everybody knew that!

Reply 28

goatshed

Lol i love how no one has explained it :smile:

and yet everyone just accepts it, because it makes "sense". I could reason anything saying it just makes "sense" :biggrin:

People always say its the axioms that give maths its laws and so on, but if it just makes "sense" then just explain it :P

Edit: Btw gief answer i would love to know.

Reply 29

Small123

majikthise

They may lack flair and originality, but they can still do proofs.

It's not exactly easy or accessible to do so though. Anyone can go on wolframalpha and do A Level Maths but thanks for that link; an interesting read.

Reply 30

Lou Reed

We have defined "1" as a number, and "2" as a number twice as great as "1". We have defined the function "+" as summation. Then 1+1 would be summing two 1's, this results in a number twice as great as "1" which we have defined as the number "2".

Reply 31

Unperfect

I think the main proof, among others that exist, is the one Russell published in his Principia Mathematica:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=umhistmath;cc=umhistmath;rgn=full%20text;idno=AAT3201.0002.001;didno=AAT3201.0002.001;view=pdf;seq=00000126
Its 110.643

or another scan
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=umhistmath&cc=umhistmath&idno=aat3201.0001.001&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=401

54.43

However I can't understand this and I would only expect a math/philosphy grad to understand this so for now you must accept that 1+1=2 :p:

Reply 32

danny111

maxfire

Because if it didn't, the universe would implode.

wtf? when did emma watson get a boob job?

Reply 33

v1k2a3t4

Dont you love asking yourself these kind of questions :L. It's like me getting myself in a tizz with questions like, who name everything-why couldnt one be two, why didnt they call a table a chair etc etc

Reply 34

Banburyhammer

OP, its been proved using pure logic.

And no, you dont want to see it.

Reply 35

Pawsies

Think of it in humans terms.

1+1 = 3 (a small family) :wink:

Reply 36

JohnnySPal

No really, lifted straight out of the Principia Mathematica...

Reply 37

allieRAWR!

I don't understand. Mathmeticians, why does there need to be a proof for this? If you put, say, one cup next to another, the word two is simply a description for the number of cups standing together. Why does that not suffice?