Show us your math genius

[JWinslow23]

An alternate formula for phi:

Code: Select all

         ________
        /  __
       / \/45+5
 \    / --------
  \  /      __
   \/     \/20

Phi is the golden ratio, the sum of 1 and the square root of 5 divided by 2,

Code: Select all

    _
1+\/5
-----
  2

I found that out myself!

Do you have any mathematical oddities to share?

[Firaga]

Code: Select all

2 + 2 = 5

[HansAgain]

Code: Select all

2 + 2 = 5

Just amazing.

[Qcode]

...

[Qcode]

...

[Camewel]

This thread is awful and you should feel bad about making it.

And I'm not even joking here this is just an utterly awful thread.
also hi qcode that was mine

[BobTheLawyer]

Code: Select all

x = 0

Divide by X

My genius, divide by 0 error. :P

[Camewel]

Novice mistake there Bob, it's actually fine to divide by X there, no matter what value it has, because both sides contain X so you're just cancelling it out of the equation.

[BobTheLawyer]

No... It... It can't be true...

[Qcode]

...

[popcan12]

64+64x2x2= 320
...I can't live anymore.

[Camewel]

64+64x2x2= 512

Wrong.

If you're "trolling herp derp sarcasms" you're pretty bad at it.

[popcan12]

Wrong why? Is it because there's no spaces?

Edit: Just realized, you're right, I forgot order of operations...

[rokit]

(it's not that hard to just go on google)




totally made it myself

[popcan12]

(It's not that hard to just go on google).


Totally made it myself.

Yes, totally Mr. Wikimedia.

[BobTheLawyer]

x = 3

[TheJonyMyster]

22/7 isn't actually pi.
*gasp*

[Qcode]

...

[BobTheLawyer]

There is no fraction to represent .999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999...
At least in my logic, which would make it the only repeating number without a fraction (though if you added any Integer, it would still probably not be able to be a fraction.)

[Camewel]

Here's a fraction to represent it:

1/1

[Qcode]

...

[BobTheLawyer]

I didn't say it was an irrational number, and Camewel, those aren't equivalent.

[Qcode]

...

[Automatik]

Additionally:

Code: Select all

x=1/3
x=0.33333333333...
x=x*3
x=0.99999999999...
x=(1/3)*3
x=3/3
x=1

[BobTheLawyer]

He's right.

Code: Select all

10x = 9.99999999...

Now subtract x from both sides of the previous equation.

Code: Select all

9x = 9.999999... - .9999999...

You must keep like terms!!!
9x - .999999... = 9
Anyways, in your theory, it should be,
9.000...1x = 9
No rounding in math!!!

Additionally:

Code: Select all

x=1/3
x=0.33333333333...
x=x*3
x=0.99999999999...
x=(1/3)*3
x=3/3
x=1

You are forgetting why 1/3 = .333333...
Because you are slicing 1 into 3 parts.
It cannot truly equal .333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 or whatever because it goes infinetly small. Never to a four, but always bigger and bigger.
This is so when it combines with 2/3, which = .66666...
It equals 1
If you added up the numbers, you should get .999999999999999999999999999999999999999999..., but that destroys the value of 1/3 and reduces it.
You can never truly put a decimal for 1/3, without increasing or decreasing its value.
.3333333... is symbolizing how it goes infinitely on.
.99999999999999999... would be the number you would start on if I said x < 1
By putting .999999... = 1, you would therefore obliterate the difference between < and <=

[Automatik]

" but that destroys the value of 1/3 and reduces it."
No, why?
Also, there is a wikipedia article on it.

In mathematics, the repeating decimal 0.999... (sometimes written with more or fewer 9s before the final ellipsis, or as 0.9, , 0.(9)) denotes a real number that can be shown to be the number one. In other words, the symbols "0.999..." and "1" represent the same number. Proofs of this equality have been formulated with varying degrees of mathematical rigor, taking into account preferred development of the real numbers, background assumptions, historical context, and target audience.

[JWinslow23]

Before I root you, are you over 18?

If the expression equals 0, u=0.

If the expression does not equal 0,there is no solution.

[BobTheLawyer]

This doesn't make any sense...
This totally defeats the difference between < and <=...

[Automatik]

Again, why?
Since .999999999999999999999999... is 1.
There is really no difference between the two numbers.
1-.99999999999999999...=0.00000000000000000000000000...=0

[BobTheLawyer]

Because. Then you loose the concept of being infinitely close, without being equal.

[Qcode]

...

[Automatik]

infinitely close=equal
And again, it has been proven

[BobTheLawyer]

I defy math

[rokit]

if you cut 1 into 3 equal parts all of them will be .33 recurring.
so 0.33 * 3 recurring should be 1.

yet if you think about it at first 0.99.. recurring can't be equal to 1 because it will 0.00..001 away from it.

yet, math always proves itself wrong. there are theories about 1 being equal to 2 and such.

Code: Select all

a and b are equal and are both non zero values
so if a = b then
aa = ab
or
a² = ab
a² - b² = ab - b² because it's still balanced
so (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) (factorize)
divide out (a-b) leaves us with a+b = b and since a = b, b+b = b
so 2b = b
divide by b
2 = 1 

yet substituting that with numbers

Code: Select all

1=1
1² = 1*1
1² - 1² = 1*1 - 1² still balanced
(1-1)*(1+1) = 1*(1-1) so basically 0=0 so far so it makes sense
since the next step is divide out (a-b) we have run into a problem, because it will always be zero. 
continuing...
(1+1) = 1
2 = 1

i dunno man, maths

[TheSeek]

yet, math always proves itself wrong. there are theories about 1 being equal to 2 and such.

Code: Select all

a and b are equal and are both non zero values
so if a = b then
aa = ab
or
a² = ab
a² - b² = ab - b² because it's still balanced
so (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) (factorize)
divide out (a-b) leaves us with a+b = b and since a = b, b+b = b
so 2b = b
divide by b
2 = 1 

yet substituting that with numbers

Code: Select all

1=1
1² = 1*1
1² - 1² = 1*1 - 1² still balanced
(1-1)*(1+1) = 1*(1-1) so basically 0=0 so far so it makes sense
since the next step is divide out (a-b) we have run into a problem, because it will always be zero. 
continuing...
(1+1) = 1
2 = 1

i dunno man, maths

uhm...

yet if you think about it at first 0.99.. recurring can't be equal to 1 because it will 0.00..001 away from it.

if it will 0.000..001 away from it, then it's 0.99...9998, not 0.999...

[Camewel]

There is no such thing as being infinitely close to but not equal with real numbers. With real numbers, there is always another number between two given numbers. If there is no number between the two numbers, then the two numbers have to be equal. Watch this video I don't have the effort to convince you properly.

Also, this thread was meant to be "show off your maths genius" not "display your incompetence" so Bob you're doing it wrong.

[BobTheLawyer]

Also, this thread was meant to be "show off your maths genius" not "display your incompetence" so Bob you're doing it wrong.

:(

[rokit]

yet, math always proves itself wrong. there are theories about 1 being equal to 2 and such.

Code: Select all

a and b are equal and are both non zero values
so if a = b then
aa = ab
or
a² = ab
a² - b² = ab - b² because it's still balanced
so (a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b) (factorize)
divide out (a-b) leaves us with a+b = b and since a = b, b+b = b
so 2b = b
divide by b
2 = 1 

yet substituting that with numbers

Code: Select all

1=1
1² = 1*1
1² - 1² = 1*1 - 1² still balanced
(1-1)*(1+1) = 1*(1-1) so basically 0=0 so far so it makes sense
since the next step is divide out (a-b) we have run into a problem, because it will always be zero. 
continuing...
(1+1) = 1
2 = 1

i dunno man, maths

uhm...

yet if you think about it at first 0.99.. recurring can't be equal to 1 because it will 0.00..001 away from it.

if it will 0.000..001 away from it, then it's 0.99...9998, not 0.999...

1) i have no idea why you pointed it out that i got it from the internet. wasn't it so obvious?
2) im assuming that 0.99... is not equal to 1. also, 0.99..998 + 0.00..001 = 0.99...

[Camewel]

0.999999... is equal to one though. That's like saying "I'm assuming 1/2 isn't equal to 2/4" it's garbage and meaningless.

[TheSeek]

1) i have no idea why you pointed it out that i got it from the internet. wasn't it so obvious?

clearly you didnt read what it was in the link...i pointed out that the logic you used has fallacies, and that link shows why

2) im assuming that 0.99... is not equal to 1. also, 0.99..998 + 0.00..001 = 0.99...

failing hard at simple math...
0.999...9998 is not a repeating decimal cuz in this case the 9 doesnt repeat endlessly(like a repeating decimal would) cuz it ends in 8. So 0.99..998 + 0.00..001 = 0.99(a definite decimal), not 0.99...(a repeating decimal), which is very different.