English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Hai friends these maths problems shows 0=1=2=3=4=5= 6=7=8.... ......... ..infinity
if u think different u can get more wonders with numbers
Therm 1)
4==5
(4-(9/2))^2= =(5---(9/ 2))^2
(-1/2)^2==(1/ 2)^2
apply root both sides
then cancel squre both sides
1/4==1/4
so 4==5
-1 both sides
so 3==4
-1 both sides
so 2==3
as per a=b,b=c --------->a=c so
1=2=3=4=5=6= 7=8
Therm 2)
(-12)==(-12)
9-21==16-28
add 49/4 both sides
9-21+(49/4)= =16-28+(49/ 4)
3^2--2*3*(7/ 2)+(7/2)^ 2==4^2--2* 4*(7/2)+( 7/2)^2
it is a^2+b^2-2ab= =(a-b)^2
so apply this formula
(3-(7/2))^2= =(4-(7/2) )^2
apply root both side
and cancel squres
(3-(7/2))==( 4-(7/2))
so 3==4
Therm 3)
0==0
a^2-a^2==a^2- a^2
a*(a-a)==(a+ a)(a-a)
cancel (a-a) both sides
so
a=(a+a)
if a=1
1=2
Therem 4)
-20==-20
16-36==25-45
add 81/4 both sides
16-36+(81/4) ==25-45+( 81/4)
apply a^2+b^2-2ab= =(a-b)^2
(4-(9/2))^2= =(5-(81/4) )^2
finally u get
4==5

2006-10-11 20:40:02 · 7 answers · asked by rameshgavva 2 in Science & Mathematics Mathematics

7 answers

The error in problems 1, 2, and 4 is the same: you assume x²=y² implies x=y. It does not, it only shows that x=±y. In every case above, the actual equality is x=-y, but your "friend" assumes incorrectly that x=y and thus derives an absurdity.

In problem 3, note that (a-a)=0. So all that "theorem" is asserting is that a*0=(a+a)*0, which is true of any two numbers, and in no way implies that a=a+a, as your "friend" incorrectly derives by dividing by zero.

Putting it simply, your "friend" is full of it.

2006-10-12 02:17:27 · answer #1 · answered by Pascal 7 · 0 0

why not just say this:

x = y

proof #1:
x*0 = y*0
0 = 0
therefore x=y.

proof #2:

1 ^ x = 1 ^ y
1 = 1
therefore x=y

You can use tricks like multiplying by 0, using 1 to the power of anything, or dividing by 0 to do these sorts of proof. Don't be fooled by these backwards proofs.

2006-10-11 20:52:38 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan A 2 · 0 0

Your first mistake occured in line 1 when you wrote that "0=1".

2006-10-11 20:53:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Your assumption of 4==5 itself is wrong...then? Further 0==0 who equates zero to zero???

2006-10-11 20:53:11 · answer #4 · answered by wisecrack 2 · 0 0

That was cool! Quite funny :)

2006-10-11 20:54:34 · answer #5 · answered by |:-) 1 · 0 0

What?

2006-10-11 23:53:07 · answer #6 · answered by quatt47 7 · 1 0

OH......................MY..........................GOD. I think I,d get one total migraine if I read that whole thing, yiiiiiiii.

2006-10-11 20:45:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers