General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
I know I should say this, all things given, but I have to say that the above emoticon is the finest creations in the whole of the universe. Never has something so simple caused so much hassle and yet so much joy to a bunch of nerds on forums... |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
The mistake is the firs line...
a=b The very nature of algebraic equation is to use a single letter to represent a single integer thus allowing an unknown number to be represented as said letter. a cannot equal b because algebra states that a must only equal a and b must only equal b. that aside... in the fourth line: (a+b) (a-b) = b (a-b) this suggests that (a+b) is equal to b which again at the top of the equation is stated that a=b so how can a+b = b There's a whole sh-ugar storm of assmption disguised by the infinitely daring leap-of-faith attitude that if u put 1+2=3 as letters you can just re-write the laws of physics as you see fit. Unfortunately 1=1 which is why your gross montly paycheck didn't just double after reading neinstein's theorem above. Good show though a+b/b for effort |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
I could have concluded it was zero if the last line was omitted.
I totally agree on the calculus/algebra thing. You cannt have two distinctly different given values (x and y for example) in algebra for the same number though. You can on one occasion have two different numericals represented with one universal value (say x) however*. *This exception being a square root... eg. SqRoot of 9 = x x = either +3 or -3 or indeed as the answer is in this case 0 |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
There is still this one big mistake noone has pointed out.
When going from 4th line to 5th line (a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b) to (a+b) = b you are essentially dividing by (a-b), which equals zero (as first line states a=b). Division by zero is not allowed, so all calcuations after that are irrelevant. ...moving back to the shadows... |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
There is still this one big mistake noone has pointed out. When dividing by (a-b) you're stating: A+b = b OR a-b = 0 The last one is often forgotten, but is true in this case, since a = b |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
a cannot equal b because algebra states that a must only equal a and b must only equal b. this suggests that (a+b) is equal to b which again at the top of the equation is stated that a=b so how can a+b = b Division by zero is not allowed, so all calcuations after that are irrelevant. Edit: Yeah that's it, in "classic" algebra math rules the following mistake is made: |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
The first one (a + b = b) is also true, as there is a number out of the set of real numbers for which there is defined answer: a = b = 0. It's the part where both sides need to be divided by (a - b) that isn't permitted, as division by zero doesn't have a defined solution in real number algebra. Point is the OR statements are left out. Same for the 2nd to last line, you're dividing by a. Either that's possible, or a = 0. That's what caused the mess. |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
Heh noticed you removed your "or divide by 0", but that isnt possible because that will equal nothing, so as soon as you divide a or b by 0 it equals nothing (my maths is a bit sketchy, but I think thats correct). Even Windows Calculator wont allow you to divide by 0 as the answer would be nothing, which it cannot generate - look for yourself!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
Heh noticed you removed your "or divide by 0", but that isnt possible because that will equal nothing, so as soon as you divide a or b by 0 it equals nothing (my maths is a bit sketchy, but I think thats correct). Even Windows Calculator wont allow you to divide by 0 as the answer would be nothing, which it cannot generate - look for yourself! |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|