Proving 1=2?

[Rohan 364]

Quote

x² = x + x + x +....x terms
Differentiating both sides w.r.t. x,
2x = 1 + 1 + 1 + ....x terms
2x=x
2=1

I couldn't find any mistake, can you?

Edited July 27, 2016 by Rohan

[Chaos 1,427]

2x=x

2x-x=0

x=0

[Shawnic 2,977]

2 hours ago, Rohan said:

I couldn't find any mistake, can you?

Your mistake lies here:

2x=x
2=1

You cannot cancel x since the only value of x for which 2x = x is 0 and you can't divide by zero. 

[Zac 129]

First, 1=0 and now 1=2. Next you'll be telling me 1=Avocado. 

[Emfoofoo 1,389]

....can't we just leave math alone for a little while? i'm sure it doesn't enjoy being forcibly changed all the time.

4 hours ago, Zac said:

First, 1=0 and now 1=2. Next you'll be telling me 1=Avocado. 

1 = avocado's number

[Rohan 364]

Oh Yea! Thanks guys!  

[Chaos 1,427]

9 hours ago, Zac said:

First, 1=0 and now 1=2. Next you'll be telling me 1=Avocado. 

@Rosettaroses

@Liberty

5 hours ago, Emfoofoo said:

....can't we just leave math alone for a little while? i'm sure it doesn't enjoy being forcibly changed all the time.

1 = avocado's number

6.023x10²³ is Avogadro's number so yeah that makes sense defo

[Agent P 2,480]

2 hours ago, Chaos said:

@Rosettaroses

@Liberty

6.023x10²³ is Avogadro's number so yeah that makes sense defo

Mathematicians here are like

"final double x = 1.0;

x = 6.023 * 10E23;

x = x;

1.0 = 6.023 * 10E23;

There you go, find the error "

Like some are still reasonable but some proofs are just wrong like "square both sides" it's almost like trying to change the value of a constant and then saying the CHANGED value is equal to the ORIGINAL value. It's just not possible.

I like math, but some of these "proofs" are just plain stupid. This particular one was actually pretty good, I'm just saying in general. If you know the error already, why do you even post it and say "im a genius huehuehue"

this was not aimed at any particular person at all.

[Is It Really Necessary 1,574]

13 hours ago, Zac said:

First, 1=0 and now 1=2. Next you'll be telling me 1=Avocado. 

Me, the fabulous person who turned your 'likes' into a three digit number, thank me.

Edited July 28, 2016 by Is It Really Necessary

[Conan Edogawa 837]

6 hours ago, Agent P said:

Mathematicians here are like...Also no. Mathematics is done with a specific

"final double x = 1.0;

x = 6.023 * 10E23;

x = x;

1.0 = 6.023 * 10E23;

There you go, find the error "

Like some are still reasonable but some proofs are just wrong like "square both sides" it's almost like trying to change the value of a constant and then saying the CHANGED value is equal to the ORIGINAL value. It's just not possible.

I like math, but some of these "proofs" are just plain stupid. This particular one was actually pretty good, I'm just saying in general. If you know the error already, why do you even post it and say "im a genius huehuehue"

thi.

 

To shine light on certain mathematical concepts, which may be confusing to certain people.

...

Quote

Mathematicians here are like...Also no. Mathematics is done with specific laws and procedures that must be taken. If you don't believe me, look at MSE/MSO. SE and SO will kill you if you don't provide a logical proof of your statements.

"final double x = 1.0;

x = 6.023 * 10E23;

x = x;

1.0 = 6.023 * 10E23;

There you go, find the error "

 

Edited July 28, 2016 by Field of Dreams

[Conan Edogawa 837]

On 7/27/2016 at 6:43 AM, Rohan said:

I couldn't find any mistake, can you?

x² = x + x + x +....x terms
Differentiating both sides w.r.t. x,

This seems to assume that if you differentiate both sides, you will still get the same answer

x²=4

dif.w.rx,

2x = 0

Obviously both equations have different solutions.

2x = 1 + 1 + 1 + ....x terms
2x=x
2=1

On 7/27/2016 at 6:43 AM, Rohan said:

I couldn't find any mistake, can you?

 

[Emfoofoo 1,389]

11 hours ago, Chaos said:

@Rosettaroses

@Liberty

6.023x10²³ is Avogadro's number so yeah that makes sense defo

okay

[Zac 129]

10 hours ago, Is It Really Necessary said:

Me, the fabulous person who turned your 'likes' into a three digit number, thank me.

I'm sure it would have happened on its own  but thanks nonetheless

[Conan Edogawa 837]

23 hours ago, Emfoofoo said:

....can't we just leave math alone for a little while? i'm sure it doesn't enjoy being forcibly changed all the time.

1 = avocado's number

Mathematics is NOT being changed. It is being manipulated into producing false statements.

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Field of Dreams

[Emfoofoo 1,389]

1 hour ago, Field of Dreams said:

Mathematics is NOT being changed. It is being manipulated into producing false statements.

 

well, everytime i revisit it every year, something about it always changes and i hate it. 

[Conan Edogawa 837]

Just now, Emfoofoo said:

well, everytime i revisit it every year, something about it always changes and i hate it. 

Yeah, those "changing details" are already existing details of math.

[Emfoofoo 1,389]

Just now, Field of Dreams said:

Yeah, those "changing details" are already existing details of math.

....whatever.

[Conan Edogawa 837]

1 minute ago, Emfoofoo said:

....whatever.

Calculus was not a "super new" detail of math. It was invented 300 years ago.

[Rohan 364]

err..this topic didn't really go as expected...

[Liberty 2,305]

On 7/28/2016 at 4:31 AM, Chaos said:

@Rosettaroses

@Liberty

6.023x10²³ is Avogadro's number so yeah that makes sense defo

So back then I didn't understand why you tagged us and then realized someone said Avocado above you lol