Proof That 2 + 2 = 5

by 106 replies
248
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?
#off topic forum
  • 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.

    That's the problem with your 'Simple' solution, everyone who reads that will end up headless.

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













    .jrd #33
  • Well actually, Thomas may be correct!

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

    Bud
    • [2] replies
    • Hmmm... very persuasive. Imagine how much more persuasive it would be if it made any sense whatsoever.

    • Thats awesome.. Ask him to prove it here.
      • [1] reply
  • This step makes no sense...

    Likewise, this last step also makes no sense.

    Unless I'm missing something...
    • [1] reply
    • Well, he's calculating in Gaelic -- so if you don't speak it, you'll need to get someone to translate for you.
  • 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..
  • I should have known your lilliputian human minds could never comprehend such mathematical genius!

    • [1] reply
  • Very confusing thread start..
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • ยกǝɯ oʇ ǝsuǝs sǝʞɐɯ
  • 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.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [2] replies
    • Yeah, but the only absolute in this universe is relativity.....so ya just never know.
    • 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
  • I can't understand your listing. It's without sense.
  • 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.
    • [1] reply
    • So, are this couple swingers ? just asking

      Details buddy..details !!
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [2] replies
    • 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
      • [1] reply
    • Silly posters. Always posting without reading. Tsk! Tsk!
  • 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.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • There is a padded room with your name on it Thomas...
    • [1] reply
    • Brain bending, mind blowing concept Lets just stick with the basic math, shall we?
  • basic math made the people here bored...that's why they're going for alternatives...lol
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • 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 (lbs @ $1) (lbs @ $1.50) $
    • [2] replies
    • AHHHHHH!!! Art! I thought I got away from these things when I got out of school!


    • 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
  • Banned
    I don't have any proof. Its a total wastage of time and i don't have time. My time is very precious.
    • [1] reply
    • ... though not too precious to spend replying to a 2 month old thread?
      • [1] reply
  • You lost me?
    • [2] replies
  • OMG the equation is making me explode. I should stop reading it. I have a series of exams next monday onwards! Gosh hahaah!
    • [1] reply
  • Jethro is good at ciphering Might be as good as you Tommy :p
  • 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

    Answer
    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?
  • No it can't!
  • OK.

    Now we know that Thomas works as a government statistician.
    • [ 1 ] Thanks
    • [1] reply
    • That or he's in first grade and just trying to impress his friends with "cool" math tricks.
  • You're using an older version of Excel aren't you?
  • I don't get it!

    Ed
  • But 1+1 actually = 11!
    • [7] replies
    • But 1+1 actually = 11!

      well the symbol ( ! ) is known as FACTORIAL in MATHEMATICS.... ::p
      ISNT IT???
    • [DELETED]
    • Awesome calculations. I didn't think about this and It is possible. Mind blowing maths of your. Keep it up.
    • i don't get it
      • [1] reply
    • Banned
      [DELETED]
    • "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
    • 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):
    • no that's 1 & 1
    • It's like the same as x=y
      • [2] replies
  • Wow and all these years I thought 2 + 2 = 6?
    • [1] reply

    • 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.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Is that the missing formula that has been evading mankind up until now?
  • You lost me at the (2+2) 2 (9 X (2+2) = 52)
  • [DELETED]
    • [1] reply
    • 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.

      Neat stuff to think about.

      All the best,
      Michael
      • [1] reply
  • Everyone knows 2+2=22
  • What an interesting topic.
  • hahaha, awesome!
  • 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
    • [2] replies
    • Divide by zero? You're really not supposed to do that!
    • Lemme know if this is about right.
  • 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?
  • Am very poor in this hope you can help me.
    • [1] reply
    • You do realize that posts made in 'Off Topic' do not count toward your post count, yes?
  • reading this is just a waste of time...because i can prove 2+2=5 in a better way than your's.
  • 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.
  • It's kinda' confusing. I'm not that good in math either.
  • 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
  • 2 and 2 = 4 ... trust me on that
  • I have proof 1+1=window
  • This is a bit too much for my brain :O but nice stuff mate
  • If mathematics was a literal war that can kill people, I'm sure I'm the first casualty!
    • [1] reply
  • Wow this is a very enlightening mathematical breakthrough!.. Thanks for sharing your genius...
  • I dont get it.. LOL..
  • and mystery is solved!




  • Would you trade $2 plus $2 for $5?

    Aaron
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • nether i, 2+2= 5?
  • 2+2=4
    9/2=4.5
    Hence:
    4-4.5=-.5

    Therefore:
    -.5<5

    so:
    2+2≠5
  • 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
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [2] replies
    • quick answer?

      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):
    • 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):
      • [1] reply
  • But Paul...
    I thought you weren't going to tell us how your budget will get revenue until AFTER the Election! :rolleyes:
  • [DELETED]
  • [DELETED]
  • 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
    • [1] reply
    • 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.

Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed