Talk:Mathematics/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archive page, last updated 8 October 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Divide by 0[edit]

I feel that somewhere it should be pointed out WHY that proof is incorrect, for the less mathematically inclined. It's because A-B=0, and you cannot divide by 0Researcher 19:02, 12 October 2007 (EDT)

NO, you gave away the secret. Now we can't fool people into actually believing it. Oh well, there's always the proof that 1 = -1... ThunderkatzHo! 19:24, 12 October 2007 (EDT) p.s. I guess the proof is actually irrelevant to the article, I just needed to fill space.
Spoiler: when you take the square root of both sides, you need a +/-, of course... humanUser talk:Human 16:41, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Whats 1+1? StupidIdiot 13:07, 6 November 2007 (EST)[edit]

hg

10 tmtoulouse irritate 13:09, 6 November 2007 (EST)
There are 10 kinds of people in this world: Those who understand trinary, those who don't, and those who get it confused with binary. Masterbratac 13:11, 6 November 2007 (EST)
LOL math joke Elassint Throw things at me 15:58, 6 November 2007 (EST)

Another proof[edit]

I added my favourite proof (childhood memories). Feel free to correct spelling and font of mathematical expressions. Or to delete it, whatever. Editor at CP 17:19, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Same trick as -1 = 1, isn't it? Not considering both square roots? humanUser talk:Human 17:43, 17 November 2007 (EST)

GRR![edit]

What is wrong with the proof that 0=-1? Wisest harmonic Hoover! 18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

. User:FineCheesesUser talk:FineCheeses 18:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I remain unconvinced. Wisest harmonic Hoover! 21:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Because of a falsehood perpetrated by high school teachers for hundreds of years.
See, is a SET: . This set has the property that .User:FineCheesesUser talk:FineCheeses 03:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite?[edit]

I see pages like physics, chemistry, and biology actually say something about what the field is about, but this page is just a not-too-enlightening introduction together with a bunch of dumb "proofs" about 1=2. Any objections if I try to write a bit better outline, link to the few existing math-related pages and dump the 1=2 crap somewhere else? I propose mathematical fallacies, and it could have other things too and be worked into the pseudomathematics category. In the meantime I'll add yet another fake proof. --MarkGall (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2010 (UTC)