# Proof That 2 + 2 = 5

by Thomas
106 replies
• |
Which is the same as: 16-36 = 25-45
Which can also be expressed as: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52) 9 X 5
Add 81/4 to both sides: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) + 81/4 = 52) 9 X 5 + 81/4
Rearrange the terms: ({2+2}) 9/2) 2 = (5-9/2) 2
Ergo: 2+2 - 9/2 = 5
Hence: 2 + 2 = 5

See... simple, isn't it?
•  Originally Posted by Thomas See... simple, isn't it?
Yes, simple, however you owe me a new head. Mine just exploded.

Luckily I have a cloning machine, and I have backup .jrd's for this very reason.
This is version .jrd #33 speaking to you.

Oh wait... you tricky little leprechaun killer... I'm on to you...

WARNING TO ALL LEPRECHAUNS...

IT WILL KILL YOU!!!!!!!

.jrd #33
Signature

P.S.

Join The Future: Telekinetic Marketing

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484036].message }}
• Well actually, Thomas may be correct!

I have a tax accountant friend who says he can make
2 + 2 equal anything you want!

Bud
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484092].message }}
• Hmmm... very persuasive. Imagine how much more persuasive it would be if it made any sense whatsoever.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484133].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Buddd Well actually, Thomas may be correct! I have a tax accountant friend who says he can make 2 + 2 equal anything you want! Bud

Thats awesome.. Ask him to prove it here.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2693904].message }}
• ignorance is strength
slavery is freedom
war is peace
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2712306].message }}
3 men go to a restaurant and the bill comes to Â£30 so they give the waiter Â£10 each. The waiter then realises he has overcharged them by Â£5 so he gives them back Â£1 each and pockets the other Â£2 for himself. So: it has cost the 3 men Â£9 each for the meal (Â£10 minus the Â£1 the waiter gave back).

3 x Â£9 = Â£27, plus the Â£2 the waiter kept for himself = Â£29

What happened to the other Â£1 ???
Signature

How I Make \$50 and More Every Day on Ebay With Virtually NO OUTLAY http://www.fifty-dollarsaday.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2712464].message }}
•  Originally Posted by phoenixx9000 How about this one: 3 men go to a restaurant and the bill comes to Â£30 so they give the waiter Â£10 each. The waiter then realises he has overcharged them by Â£5 so he gives them back Â£1 each and pockets the other Â£2 for himself. So: it has cost the 3 men Â£9 each for the meal (Â£10 minus the Â£1 the waiter gave back). 3 x Â£9 = Â£27, plus the Â£2 the waiter kept for himself = Â£29 What happened to the other Â£1 ???
This means the total bill came to Â£25, not Â£30.

Therefore, each man should have got Â£1.66 back, which means the extra Â£1 mentioned in the problem went into the waiter's pocket.

In other words, it should have cost each man Â£8.33 per meal, but they ended up paying Â£9 each instead, so the "missing" Â£1 is already part of the Â£2 the waiter has kept.

All the best,
Michael
Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2712603].message }}
•  Originally Posted by phoenixx9000 How about this one: 3 men go to a restaurant and the bill comes to Â£30 so they give the waiter Â£10 each. The waiter then realises he has overcharged them by Â£5 so he gives them back Â£1 each and pockets the other Â£2 for himself. So: it has cost the 3 men Â£9 each for the meal (Â£10 minus the Â£1 the waiter gave back). 3 x Â£9 = Â£27, plus the Â£2 the waiter kept for himself = Â£29 What happened to the other Â£1 ???
This is driving me nuts LOL
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949140].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas Start with: -20 = -20 Which is the same as: 16-36 = 25-45 Which can also be expressed as: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52) 9 X 5
This step makes no sense...

 Add 81/4 to both sides: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) + 81/4 = 52) 9 X 5 + 81/4 Rearrange the terms: ({2+2}) 9/2) 2 = (5-9/2) 2 Ergo: 2+2 - 9/2 = 5
Likewise, this last step also makes no sense.

Unless I'm missing something...
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484137].message }}
•  Originally Posted by eniven Unless I'm missing something...
Well, he's calculating in Gaelic -- so if you don't speak it, you'll need to get someone to translate for you.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484159].message }}
• I learnt maths and additional mathematics.. and it didnt make sense to me either

..

of course, it never ever did make sense from the start of my school life.. dun think it will make sense now..

@buddd :you know what, any chinese salesman can do the same thing..
Signature

Whats the latest movie you watched? Anything good?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484230].message }}
• I should have known your lilliputian human minds could never comprehend such mathematical genius!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484542].message }}
• I hope everyone will do me the courtesy of ignoring the fact that I ommitted "by initimdation" after "Proof" (a.k.a. "Argumentum verbosium"). Thanks, I appreciate it.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[484563].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas {COLOR=white}I hope everyone will do me the courtesy of ignoring the fact that I am fairly weird and probably intoxicated. Thanks, I appreciate it.[/COLOR]
Hmmm.......
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[485107].message }}
• But, it' not a real 5. You can't interchange multiplicands and dividends with sums and differences.
This fuzzy math could cause a global economic crisis.
Signature
â€œIf I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.â€ â€“ Isaac Newton
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[485318].message }}
•  Originally Posted by KenStrong Hmmm.......

KEN, STOP REVEALING OUR SECRETS... YOU ARE GOING TO RUIN THE FUN!!!

We don't want simple folk to easily know our superpowers now do we? Please, pretty please, go edit your post and don't reveal the secrets written in the ancient scrolls.

Don't you know of the secret magicians code? This is no different.

HMPF... *storms off dissapointed...

.jrd
Signature

P.S.

Join The Future: Telekinetic Marketing

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[485334].message }}
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[485713].message }}
• Jesus, Tommy - was that volumes of mathematics or mathematics of volumes, or mathematics on valiums?
Oh - speaking of Valiums - send a few to Jared the next time you plan to post. He seems to need preparedness.

Can I borrow the flux capacitor tomorrow? Found a great canyon and don't feel like waiting for snow melt.
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[486017].message }}
• OK Thomas - I agree with you mate - here are 4 pound coins - got them? Good.

Now give me 5 back please!

You've got to love the Irish.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[486552].message }}
• Â¡ǝɯ oʇ ǝsuǝs sǝʞɐɯ
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[486634].message }}
• Hi, Thomas,
As soon as you changed the location of the fulcrum of the equation you destroyed all logic. An equation is an equation only when there are two distinct sides. Because you have been very sloppy in your positioning of the fulcrum (=), you have shot your own foot.
Incidentally, 2 + 2 only = 4 if you make the assumption that the value of 2 is constant and the value of 4 is constant. You are in real trouble if the values ever became variable.
Signature

You might not like what I say - but I believe it.
Build it, make money, then build some more
Some old school smarts would help - and here's to Rob Toth for his help. Bloody good stuff, even the freebies!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[486823].message }}
•  Originally Posted by artwebster You are in real trouble if the values ever became variable.
Yeah, but the only absolute in this universe is relativity.....so ya just never know.
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[487719].message }}
•  Originally Posted by artwebster Hi, Thomas, As soon as you changed the location of the fulcrum of the equation you destroyed all logic. An equation is an equation only when there are two distinct sides. Because you have been very sloppy in your positioning of the fulcrum (=), you have shot your own foot. Incidentally, 2 + 2 only = 4 if you make the assumption that the value of 2 is constant and the value of 4 is constant. You are in real trouble if the values ever became variable.
but that is the beauty of math not everything in it is logical which is why rules are made to find the solution to where before there wasnt one
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2685900].message }}
• I can't understand your listing. It's without sense.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[486982].message }}
• What rubbish! Everyone knows 2 + 2 = 6 or 7, depending.

A man and woman. That's two.

Another man and a woman, that's another two.

You know they're going to have sex and end up with kids. One of the couples might even end up with twins!

Put it all together and there's your six or seven, depending!

Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[487095].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Star69 What rubbish! Everyone knows 2 + 2 = 6 or 7, depending. A man and woman. That's two. Another man and a woman, that's another two. You know they're going to have sex and end up with kids. One of the couples might even end up with twins! Put it all together and there's your six or seven, depending! Simple multiplication, er, addition.
So, are this couple swingers ? just asking

Details buddy..details !!
Signature

Whats the latest movie you watched? Anything good?

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[491568].message }}
• Banned
[DELETED]
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[488799].message }}
•  Originally Posted by DelfinaMc2008 rubbish explaination...why on earth a 2 + 2 would equal to 5.
Rubbish reply... why on earth would you expect to boost your post count in the OT forum? I suggest you try the Test Forum section to do that :p
Signature

P.S.

Join The Future: Telekinetic Marketing

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[488822].message }}
• This is where the logic starts - apply your "master" mind to selling and puffff you'll surely end up a millionaire. got me?
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[488840].message }}
•  Originally Posted by eniven This step makes no sense... Likewise, this last step also makes no sense. Unless I'm missing something...
 Originally Posted by regmac Very confusing thread start..
 Originally Posted by wscn007 confusing thread
 Originally Posted by andr102 I can't understand your listing. It's without sense.
 Originally Posted by DelfinaMc2008 rubbish explaination...why on earth a 2 + 2 would equal to 5.
Silly posters. Always posting without reading. Tsk! Tsk!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[491977].message }}
• It a great class of sums, where we can to proof 2+2=5 and so.
But it's important to find a mistake in the solution.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[490011].message }}
• There is a padded room with your name on it Thomas...
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[492203].message }}
• Brain bending, mind blowing concept Lets just stick with the basic math, shall we?
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[492494].message }}
• basic math made the people here bored...that's why they're going for alternatives...lol
Signature
Get Free Videos Here for Revolutionary New Niche Marketing
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[493420].message }}
• Mary went shopping for 4lbs of apples. She could only find two shops with apples left and each only had 2lbs. The first shop was selling apples at \$1 per lb and the other was selling them for \$1.50 per lb. Mary bought 4 lbs of apples.
So 2 (lbs @ \$1) + 2 (lbs @ \$1.50) = \$5
Signature

You might not like what I say - but I believe it.
Build it, make money, then build some more
Some old school smarts would help - and here's to Rob Toth for his help. Bloody good stuff, even the freebies!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[497364].message }}
• AHHHHHH!!! Art! I thought I got away from these things when I got out of school!

 Originally Posted by artwebster Mary went shopping for 4lbs of apples. She could only find two shops with apples left and each only had 2lbs. The first shop was selling apples at \$1 per lb and the other was selling them for \$1.50 per lb. Mary bought 4 lbs of apples. So 2 (lbs @ \$1) + 2 (lbs @ \$1.50) = \$5

So, Art, what's the damned test question?! :confused:
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[624632].message }}
•  Originally Posted by artwebster Mary went shopping for 4lbs of apples. She could only find two shops with apples left and each only had 2lbs. The first shop was selling apples at \$1 per lb and the other was selling them for \$1.50 per lb. Mary bought 4 lbs of apples. So 2 (lbs @ \$1) + 2 (lbs @ \$1.50) = \$5
Yes, but that doesn't prove that 2 + 2 = 5. That shows that 2 + 3 = 5. (2 x 1) +
(2 x 1.5) = 2 + 3 = 5
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6058363].message }}
• Banned
I don't have any proof. Its a total wastage of time and i don't have time. My time is very precious.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[623536].message }}
•  Originally Posted by roofcoatings My time is very precious.
... though not too precious to spend replying to a 2 month old thread?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[623627].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas ... though not too precious to spend replying to a 2 month old thread?
Tommy, quit replying to old threads -- we know you're just trying to raise your post count.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[624562].message }}
•  Originally Posted by KenStrong Tommy, quit replying to old threads -- we know you're just trying to raise your post count.
Eeek... I've been rumbled!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[625187].message }}
• You lost me?
Signature
The New Way To Search Google.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[625208].message }}
• Here is a video that will explain the math.

Signature

\"Person who say something cannot be done, should not interrupt person doing it.\"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[625247].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Rick McCombs Here is a video that will explain the math. YouTube - Ma & Pa Kettle Math
Thanks Rick, I haven't seen a Kettle movie in years.
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[625271].message }}
•  Originally Posted by GoogleSearchToday.com You lost me?
We've been trying.
Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[625267].message }}
• OMG the equation is making me explode. I should stop reading it. I have a series of exams next monday onwards! Gosh hahaah!
Signature
Home Power Generator Secrets - even YOU need to power your computer. Learn how to save more electricity!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[626293].message }}
• This is almost as bad as 7 X 13 = 28
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[627001].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim This is almost as bad as 7 X 13 = 28
You forgot to finish reducing it 7 X 13 = 1
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[627184].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim This is almost as bad as 7 X 13 = 28
I can prove that too but enough heads have exploded...
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[627895].message }}
• Jethro is good at ciphering Might be as good as you Tommy :p
Signature

siggy taking a break...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[628018].message }}
• Proof that 2+2=5(just thought of it)
You have TWO Eyes
Close your right eye. You have one field of vision.
Close your left eye to perceive the other field of vision
Open them both for the whole vision 2+2=5
2 eyes plus 2 halves of 1 whole field of vision equals 5

That's not including what you can't see. So if our eyes only perceive 10% of the data our brain sends it then each eye is only ever working at 2.5% proficiency while the other is closed. That's assuming of course that proficiency isn't increased when the eyes are closed. So 5 equals 50, but it could equal 50 million with eyes closed, mind open. there's just a hell of a lot more ones.

1+1=3 Right brain, Left brain, Whole Brain, No Brain?

Zero equals not none, but is a lesser form of one.
Proof? 1 times any number is itself...0 times any number is 0(i.e. itself)
0 is not a number, but when multiplied by one it is already itself.

I'm supposed to believe that 0 does not fit in the Fibonacci Sequence, yet still believe that nothing exists? I wonder if there are any other places in the universe where nothing=something??? Hmmm... I wonder. Answers lead to questions which lead to numbers which lead to words which all boil down to the number 4
Question
Eight
Five
Four

Six
Three
Five
Four

Nothing less and nothing more...peace or distress we've seen it all before.

Pi=mmm! and imaginary number i=

Oh damn these words that formulate these questions that spawn numbers that leads to rules that we learn not to question. Damn this 5th dimension that harbors the creativity needed to produce such a cruel invention.
For measuring the longest length of time with the shortest ruler has become my latest obsession.
Any questions?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1917271].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas Which is the same as: 16-36 = 25-45 Which can also be expressed as: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52) 9 X 5
No it can't!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1917297].message }}
• OK.

Now we know that Thomas works as a government statistician.
Signature
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1917415].message }}
•  Originally Posted by whateverpedia OK. Now we know that Thomas works as a government statistician.
That or he's in first grade and just trying to impress his friends with "cool" math tricks.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1917717].message }}
• You're using an older version of Excel aren't you?
Signature
Smarter Affiliate Money. Work Smarter, Earn More.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1919533].message }}
• I don't get it!

Ed
Signature

Grants of Cornwall are Gold Buyers who buy Scrap Gold at fanatastic prices!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1920949].message }}
• But 1+1 actually = 11!
Signature
The Wait Is Almost Over...

Do You SUCK At Writing & Marketing Articles? Just Wait Till You Get Your Hands On My Book! (Coming Soon!)
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1923091].message }}
• But 1+1 actually = 11!

well the symbol ( ! ) is known as FACTORIAL in MATHEMATICS.... ::p
ISNT IT???
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2296155].message }}
• Awesome calculations. I didn't think about this and It is possible. Mind blowing maths of your. Keep it up.
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2688144].message }}
• i don't get it
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2865318].message }}
• I don't think any of us do, hahahahah.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3948994].message }}
• "If there is anything that is infinite in this universe it is the human ability to play mind-twisting word games in order to justify a given idea."

Joe Mobley
Signature

.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4874197].message }}
• LET ME SEE NOW, OH YES UHUMM,....

Knowing what a proof is, is the first step in answering this question. From what I am familiar with...

A proof is: a set of logical steps acquired through deductive (therefore, not making any giant leaps in logic, unless by definition), and hence, empirically (from the evidence provided) resulting in a direct equivalence (being, among other types of equivalence, but primarily, in permutation, multiplicative/additively & negatively/positively & even/odd... meta-mathematically) of states, that's shortest distance is (in absolute terms), either infinity, zero, and/or, also, one.

Really, the attempted 'proof' of 2 + 2 = 5 is based on a distorted type of Trigonometry, which was in essence the source of today's Calculus (just try to draw Tangent or Secant without running into the idea of Calculus' derivative & integral, respectively), and actually is the result of any additive equavalence of any two numbers' to being alike to any number, (because measuring hypotenuse of a given sides is essentially multiplicative, hence partially irrational).

(Which makes me wonder... is there a 2 * 2 = 5 equivalent? and the answer is a resounding, yes! But first the 'proof' as written by Charles Seife.)

Let a & b each be equal to 1. Since a ^ b are equal,

b^2 = ab ...(eq.1)

Since a equals itself, it is obvious that

a^2 = a^2 ...(eq.2)

Subtract equation 1 from equation 2. This yeilds

(a^2) - (b^2) = (a^2)-ab ...(eq. 3)

We can factor both sides of the equation; (a^2)-ab equals a(a-b). Likewise, (a^2)-(b^2) equals (a + b)(a - b) (Nothing fishy is going on here. Ths statement is perfectly true. Plug in numbers and see for yourself!) Substituting into the equation 3 , we get

(a+b)(a-b) = a (a-b) ...(eq.5)

So far, so good. Now divide both sides of the equation by (a-b) and we get

a + b = a ...(eq.5)

b = 0 ...(eq.6)

But we set b to 1 at the very beginning of this proof, so this means that

1 = 0 ...(eq.7)

...Anyways, getting that far gives us the jist of the proof, later in the proof, Charles Seife goes on to prove that Winston Churchill was a carrot! if you want to know how that is possible, I recommend you read the book.

From equation 7, add a number to either side and get it equal to any other number, one greater than itself.

Multiplying equation 7 after adding to it, and one can get: any number is equal to any other number.

Hence, conceptually, any number is equal to zero, and, theoretically, that includes infinity. But that's also the reason why when you divide by zero, it is 'Undefined.' Which, consequentially, is what is happening in this equation... just subsistute 1 into equation 3 and one will see that we are dividing by zero in equation 5.

This is what lead to the invention of calculus. Really, from here this segways into Hilbert Space... but that is best left for another entry, hopefully, on the actual subject of quantazation.

That's all I have time for...

THIS PROOF IS BY DEFINITION INCORRECT, but it provides a good tool as of why we define things in mathematics the way we do.

A good question to ask from here would be (based on my previous tangent):

Does 1/3 plus 1/3 plus 1/3 = 1?
Or, does it equal just zero point nine repeating?
Source(s):
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6063847].message }}
•  Originally Posted by acrasial But 1+1 actually = 11!
no that's 1 & 1
Signature

Selling Ain't for Sissies
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6800215].message }}
• It's like the same as x=y
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7363329].message }}
• You realize that the original poster of this thread from 2009 may well have died from old age. Let this one drop please
Signature

Where ever you go, there you are.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071257].message }}
•  Originally Posted by lanfear63 You realize that the original poster of this thread from 2009 may well have died from old age. Let this one drop please
Is it Claude? Is it Claude? Please tell me it's Claude!!!!
Signature
Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071549].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Kurt Is it Claude? Is it Claude? Please tell me it's Claude!!!!
No, Claude is already dead, but he is coming back here from the grave as a ghost to torment us.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071571].message }}
• Yeah... somehow I don't think it's old age that's gonna do him in...
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071555].message }}
• Wow and all these years I thought 2 + 2 = 6?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1923151].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Brian Tayler Wow and all these years I thought 2 + 2 = 6?

No, two and two would be 22. If you put two two's together, that makes 22. Two and two. Twenty Two. LOL. It's SIMPLE MATH LOL.
Signature
The Wait Is Almost Over...

Do You SUCK At Writing & Marketing Articles? Just Wait Till You Get Your Hands On My Book! (Coming Soon!)
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1924430].message }}
• Is that the missing formula that has been evading mankind up until now?
Signature
I never think of the future, it comes soon enough.
(Albert Einstein)
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1923930].message }}
• You lost me at the (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52)
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2689155].message }}
• [DELETED]
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2714316].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Daryl Lim Zis is impossible, nuff said. 2+ 2 = 4 is as good as the law of gravity. In fact, more impressed than gravity. Gravity only works on Earth but the law of arithmetics works everywhere in the Universe.
Gravity works everywhere in the Universe.

If it only worked ON the earth, we wouldn't have an orbit around the sun, as it wouldn't have any gravitational effect on us. And that's only the beginning.

The rules of arithmetic are the same where WE apply them. However, you need beings that can think and reason to use arithmetic. Most planets and stars do not have such beings, so arithmetic is not even close to universal. But, again, the rules of arithmetic apply everywhere.

All the best,
Michael
Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2715008].message }}
• Does it? I would concede that the curvature of space-time from mass (i.e. Gravity) is universal. So while it may "work" everywhere in the Universe, its presence is not "felt" everywhere (Yes a variant of the "if a tree falls and nobody hears it..." argument). Just like our friend the atom, 99.999999% of the Universe is empty space. On average, matter accounts for less than 1 atom per cubic inch.

And while on the subject of relativity... what if there is a cosmological constant? All signs point to yes... ironically, it is variable. So Einstein's greatest mistake may have been closer than he ever dared dream to this quantum reality we are just beginning to understand.

The "rules" of the arithmetical are indeed universal. If a species somewhere had six digits per hand, chances are they'd use a base-12 numeric system.
But A^2 + B^2 will still equal C^2... unless of course, you are taking a god-awful class in Non-Euclidean Geometry hahahahahahahahaha

Just as if the order of operations were toyed with...
say some alien race decided to add first, then multiply.
That's fine too... so long as they did so consistently, a primer could be crafted to "map" their arithmetic with our own.

No matter the base... no matter the rules.... 2+2 will equal 4... the names may be different (only to protect the innocent).... but after the translation, 4 is... well... 4. These tweaks are syntax choices... the equations would look bizzare... but they'd essentially be the same.

So even though Daryl was incorrect... and you are correct... the path you took to get there was a bit flawed my friend.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949049].message }}
•  Originally Posted by mikelstott Just like our friend the atom, 99.999999% of the Universe is empty space. On average, matter accounts for less than 1 atom per cubic inch.
That's not true either... Some 98% of the Universe is occupied, by either dark energy, dark matter, or 'normal' matter. Around 2% of the Universe is truly empty space. Between 'normal' matter and dark matter they make up around 30% of the Universe.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5516456].message }}
• Everyone knows 2+2=22
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2714811].message }}
• What an interesting topic.
Signature
Kooday - Earn Cash With Kooday!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2714832].message }}
• hahaha, awesome!
Signature
Money Button That Works! My income ~\$100/day.
Now you can make thousands of cash online.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2724049].message }}
• Wow. This was a very fun thread to read. Too bad even those of us with Mathematics degrees couldn't parse the statements. First off, how can one equation loaded with constants equal another equation? This seems like circular logic to me.... however- I have fun with my advanced students with this algebraic gem... 10,000 points to the first person to correctly critique my proof:

In the spirit of this thread (and George Orwell), I will slightly alter my "proof"
Typically, I demonstrate that one equals zero. But, we can pretend we work at the Federal Bureau of Statistics and fudge the numbers by adding a couple steps... we will play with this Euclidean-Style... enjoy

Preamble
1. Let A = Some Real Number
2. Let B = Some Real Number

Supposition
Let A = B

If so, let the games begin.....

1. A = B
2. Add negative B to both sides --> (A - B) = (B - B)
3. Simplify --> (A-B) = 0
4. Divide by the quantity (A-B) --> (A-B)/(A-B) = (0)/(A-B)
5. Simplify --> (A-B)/(A-B) = 1 --> 1 = 0
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3948915].message }}
•  Originally Posted by mikelstott 3. Simplify --> (A-B) = 0 4. Divide by the quantity (A-B) --> (A-B)/(A-B) = (0)/(A-B)
Divide by zero? You're really not supposed to do that!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949050].message }}
•  Originally Posted by mikelstott Wow. This was a very fun thread to read. Too bad even those of us with Mathematics degrees couldn't parse the statements. First off, how can one equation loaded with constants equal another equation? This seems like circular logic to me.... however- I have fun with my advanced students with this algebraic gem... 10,000 points to the first person to correctly critique my proof: In the spirit of this thread (and George Orwell), I will slightly alter my "proof" Typically, I demonstrate that one equals zero. But, we can pretend we work at the Federal Bureau of Statistics and fudge the numbers by adding a couple steps... we will play with this Euclidean-Style... enjoy Preamble 1. Let A = Some Real Number 2. Let B = Some Real Number Supposition Let A = B If so, let the games begin..... 1. A = B 2. Add negative B to both sides --> (A - B) = (B - B) Anything after this equation is a false statement. If you put any number into this equation it comes out to be 0 = 0. So if you simplify it... 3. Simplify --> (A-B) = 0 ...this equals 0 = 0... 4. Divide by the quantity (A-B) --> (A-B)/(A-B) = (0)/(A-B)...and this you can't do because the equation is indeterminate 5. Simplify --> (A-B)/(A-B) = 1 --> 1 = 0
Lemme know if this is about right.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5516420].message }}
• Since this thread keeps getting re-opened, why not just make it the 'weird math' thread:

Three people check into a hotel room. The bill is \$30, so they each pay \$10. After they go to the room, the hotel manager realizes that the bill should have only been \$25. So he gives \$5 to the bellhop and tells him to return the money to the guests. The bellhop notices that \$5 can't be split evenly between the three guests, so he keeps \$2 for himself and then gives the other \$3 to the guests.

Now the guests, with their dollars back, have each paid \$9 for a total of \$27. And the bellhop has pocketed \$2. So there is \$27 + \$2 = \$29 accounted for. But the guests originally paid \$30. What happened to the other dollar?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949266].message }}
• Am very poor in this hope you can help me.
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949281].message }}
•  Originally Posted by forexs Am very poor in this hope you can help me.
You do realize that posts made in 'Off Topic' do not count toward your post count, yes?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949293].message }}
• reading this is just a waste of time...because i can prove 2+2=5 in a better way than your's.
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3949908].message }}
• Hey, you guys all sound like Harold Camping. You should market this and you'll make millions. His math is the same way. You can make an equation for anything if you ambiguously choose numbers. It won't work almost everytime, but if you try hard enough, there's an equation that equals everything. For example: It is 19 months until 12/21/12 and the end of the Mayan Calendar. That is 21-2, because the day is the 21st. There are 31 days in December which is the month it is in subtracted from 45 which is 12+21+12 equals 14. And if you add the second digit in each of the dates of 12/21/12 you get 5. 14 + 5 equals 19. 19 months exactly until the end of the world. And if you're wondering about those 4 extra days since we are four days past the 21st, fret not. If you add the first digits in the dates 12/21/12, you get 4 which is the number you have to subtract from 19. 19 months less 4 days to the day of the end of the Mayan Calendar. . . See I did that without much thinking but I bet someone would buy that. LoL.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3951534].message }}
• It's kinda' confusing. I'm not that good in math either.
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3952487].message }}
• it is not as difficult as he did.....
see...:p

let,
-20=-20
16-36=25-45
we can write as

(4)^2 -(2*4*9/2) +(9/2)^2 = (5)^2 -(2*5*9/2) +(9/2)^2

apply the formula i.e (a-b)^2=a^2 -2ab+b^2
so,
(4-9/2)^2 = (5-9/2)^2
or,
4-9/2=5-9/2
4=5
2+2=5 proved :p
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4539368].message }}
• 2 and 2 = 4 ... trust me on that
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4873759].message }}
• I have proof 1+1=window
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4874137].message }}
• This is a bit too much for my brain :O but nice stuff mate
Signature

Blogger at RicherOrNot.com (Make Money online blog but also promoting ethical internet marketing)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4874194].message }}
• If mathematics was a literal war that can kill people, I'm sure I'm the first casualty!
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5516891].message }}
•  Originally Posted by eurekapsycrille If mathematics was a literal war that can kill people, I'm sure I'm the first casualty!
I like this
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5965211].message }}
• Wow this is a very enlightening mathematical breakthrough!.. Thanks for sharing your genius...
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5522374].message }}
• I dont get it.. LOL..
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5523932].message }}
•  Originally Posted by artwebster Hi, Thomas, As soon as you changed the location of the fulcrum of the equation you destroyed all logic. An equation is an equation only when there are two distinct sides. Because you have been very sloppy in your positioning of the fulcrum (=), you have shot your own foot. Incidentally, 2 + 2 only = 4 if you make the assumption that the value of 2 is constant and the value of 4 is constant. You are in real trouble if the values ever became variable.
and mystery is solved!

Posted from Warrior Forum Reader for Android
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5965273].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas Start with: -20 = -20 Which is the same as: 16-36 = 25-45 Which can also be expressed as: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52) 9 X 5 Add 81/4 to both sides: (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) + 81/4 = 52) 9 X 5 + 81/4 Rearrange the terms: ({2+2}) 9/2) 2 = (5-9/2) 2 Ergo: 2+2 - 9/2 = 5 Hence: 2 + 2 = 5 See... simple, isn't it?
Would you trade \$2 plus \$2 for \$5?

Aaron
Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5965299].message }}
• nether i, 2+2= 5?
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6058471].message }}
•  Originally Posted by Thomas Ergo: 2+2 - 9/2 = 5
2+2=4
9/2=4.5
Hence:
4-4.5=-.5

Therefore:
-.5<5

so:
2+2≠5
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6059685].message }}
• you want some fancy math, I got some fancy math for you, anything times 9 that's under 12 will = 9.

9 * 1 = 9
9 * 2 = 18(1+8=9)
9 * 3 = 27(2+7=9)
9 * 4 = 36(3+6=9)
etc...
also you want to get real clever, ever heard of "1337" talk? well 1+3+3=7
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6060552].message }}
• Banned
[DELETED]
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6060665].message }}

Knowing what a proof is, is the first step in answering this question. From what I am familiar with...

A proof is: a set of logical steps acquired through deductive (therefore, not making any giant leaps in logic, unless by definition), and hence, empirically (from the evidence provided) resulting in a direct equivalence (being, among other types of equivalence, but primarily, in permutation, multiplicative/additively & negatively/positively & even/odd... meta-mathematically) of states, that's shortest distance is (in absolute terms), either infinity, zero, and/or, also, one.

Really, the attempted 'proof' of 2 + 2 = 5 is based on a distorted type of Trigonometry, which was in essence the source of today's Calculus (just try to draw Tangent or Secant without running into the idea of Calculus' derivative & integral, respectively), and actually is the result of any additive equavalence of any two numbers' to being alike to any number, (because measuring hypotenuse of a given sides is essentially multiplicative, hence partially irrational).

(Which makes me wonder... is there a 2 * 2 = 5 equivalent? and the answer is a resounding, yes! But first the 'proof' as written by Charles Seife.)

Let a & b each be equal to 1. Since a ^ b are equal,

b^2 = ab ...(eq.1)

Since a equals itself, it is obvious that

a^2 = a^2 ...(eq.2)

Subtract equation 1 from equation 2. This yeilds

(a^2) - (b^2) = (a^2)-ab ...(eq. 3)

We can factor both sides of the equation; (a^2)-ab equals a(a-b). Likewise, (a^2)-(b^2) equals (a + b)(a - b) (Nothing fishy is going on here. Ths statement is perfectly true. Plug in numbers and see for yourself!) Substituting into the equation 3 , we get

(a+b)(a-b) = a (a-b) ...(eq.5)

So far, so good. Now divide both sides of the equation by (a-b) and we get

a + b = a ...(eq.5)

b = 0 ...(eq.6)

But we set b to 1 at the very beginning of this proof, so this means that

1 = 0 ...(eq.7)

...Anyways, getting that far gives us the jist of the proof, later in the proof, Charles Seife goes on to prove that Winston Churchill was a carrot! if you want to know how that is possible, I recommend you read the book.

From equation 7, add a number to either side and get it equal to any other number, one greater than itself.

Multiplying equation 7 after adding to it, and one can get: any number is equal to any other number.

Hence, conceptually, any number is equal to zero, and, theoretically, that includes infinity. But that's also the reason why when you divide by zero, it is 'Undefined.' Which, consequentially, is what is happening in this equation... just subsistute 1 into equation 3 and one will see that we are dividing by zero in equation 5.

This is what lead to the invention of calculus. Really, from here this segways into Hilbert Space... but that is best left for another entry, hopefully, on the actual subject of quantazation.

That's all I have time for...

THIS PROOF IS BY DEFINITION INCORRECT, but it provides a good tool as of why we define things in mathematics the way we do.

A good question to ask from here would be (based on my previous tangent):

Does 1/3 plus 1/3 plus 1/3 = 1?
Or, does it equal just zero point nine repeating?
Source(s):
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6063858].message }}
• Knowing what a proof is, is the first step in answering this question. From what I am familiar with...

A proof is: a set of logical steps acquired through deductive (therefore, not making any giant leaps in logic, unless by definition), and hence, empirically (from the evidence provided) resulting in a direct equivalence (being, among other types of equivalence, but primarily, in permutation, multiplicative/additively & negatively/positively & even/odd... meta-mathematically) of states, that's shortest distance is (in absolute terms), either infinity, zero, and/or, also, one.

Really, the attempted 'proof' of 2 + 2 = 5 is based on a distorted type of Trigonometry, which was in essence the source of today's Calculus (just try to draw Tangent or Secant without running into the idea of Calculus' derivative & integral, respectively), and actually is the result of any additive equavalence of any two numbers' to being alike to any number, (because measuring hypotenuse of a given sides is essentially multiplicative, hence partially irrational).

(Which makes me wonder... is there a 2 * 2 = 5 equivalent? and the answer is a resounding, yes! But first the 'proof' as written by Charles Seife.)

Let a & b each be equal to 1. Since a ^ b are equal,

b^2 = ab ...(eq.1)

Since a equals itself, it is obvious that

a^2 = a^2 ...(eq.2)

Subtract equation 1 from equation 2. This yeilds

(a^2) - (b^2) = (a^2)-ab ...(eq. 3)

We can factor both sides of the equation; (a^2)-ab equals a(a-b). Likewise, (a^2)-(b^2) equals (a + b)(a - b) (Nothing fishy is going on here. Ths statement is perfectly true. Plug in numbers and see for yourself!) Substituting into the equation 3 , we get

(a+b)(a-b) = a (a-b) ...(eq.5)

So far, so good. Now divide both sides of the equation by (a-b) and we get

a + b = a ...(eq.5)

b = 0 ...(eq.6)

But we set b to 1 at the very beginning of this proof, so this means that

1 = 0 ...(eq.7)

...Anyways, getting that far gives us the jist of the proof, later in the proof, Charles Seife goes on to prove that Winston Churchill was a carrot! if you want to know how that is possible, I recommend you read the book.

From equation 7, add a number to either side and get it equal to any other number, one greater than itself.

Multiplying equation 7 after adding to it, and one can get: any number is equal to any other number.

Hence, conceptually, any number is equal to zero, and, theoretically, that includes infinity. But that's also the reason why when you divide by zero, it is 'Undefined.' Which, consequentially, is what is happening in this equation... just subsistute 1 into equation 3 and one will see that we are dividing by zero in equation 5.

This is what lead to the invention of calculus. Really, from here this segways into Hilbert Space... but that is best left for another entry, hopefully, on the actual subject of quantazation.

That's all I have time for...

THIS PROOF IS BY DEFINITION INCORRECT, but it provides a good tool as of why we define things in mathematics the way we do.

A good question to ask from here would be (based on my previous tangent):

Does 1/3 plus 1/3 plus 1/3 = 1?
Or, does it equal just zero point nine repeating?
Source(s):
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6063860].message }}
• Truly weird...this post ( above) has appeared three times! Was it a quirk of mysterious math?
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6067868].message }}
• But Paul...
I thought you weren't going to tell us how your budget will get revenue until AFTER the Election! :rolleyes:
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6800209].message }}
• Lol dont get it.
Some steps like 3 and 4 just dont make sence.

But I really think, that in my country taxes can be cont like that. An even can be 2 + 2 = 100
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071246].message }}
•  Originally Posted by hqsoftwarelab Lol dont get it. Some steps like 3 and 4 just dont make sence. But I really think, that in my country taxes can be cont like that. An even can be 2 + 2 = 100
Yes, 2009, this has to be a record.

I mean what do you get for bumping such and old post?????

A free Warrior Forum T-shirt or something?

This is turning this forum into a f***g sick joke!

If this forum starts to put members first instead of profits, then it will slowly turn a corner and the needle will go slowly up.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11071547].message }}

### Trending Topics

WF Will

Hey Warriors! If you're trying to get media outlets and press to a publish a story for you or your client, doing a PR Campaign with Facebook Ads may be ... [read more]

• ### The evolution of marketing

WF- Enzo in Learn

For the past 150 years or so, marketing models have evolved starting from merely manufacturing a good-quality product that will sell itself over time to a more customer-centric model establishing ... [read more]

• ### Business intelligence in marketing

WF- Enzo

With all the data that's available to marketers, it is imperative that they learn how to use these information to gain better customer insight and understand desire patterns. This information ... [read more]

• ### I am very new to internet business

Patyracer

Hi folks. My name is Patrik and I am very new to internet business. So I feel very excited about how it all works. Just started a new ecommerce business ... [read more]

• ### Different way to make money with Amazon?

Steve Hartley

Hello Everyone! I am exploring different ways to make income online. Amazon is a stable platform....at least its what college studies make it seem to be. I was wondering what ... [read more]