/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2230237]

wat

[Anonymous No.2230259]

Pi has a fixed value. The troll made it so pi can vary and be the cartesian equation of a line

[Anonymous No.2230274]

+/-(3-x)=-/+(pi-x)
2x=3+pi
x=(3+pi)/2
You're back to where you started....

[Anonymous No.2230278]

π is not a variable. It is also fallacious; it should result in π = 2x-3

[Anonymous No.2230276]

>>2230259
Retard.

Just before the last line, you took the square root of (3-x)², but actually it's x-3, not 3-x, cause x>3.

[Anonymous No.2230284]

correct until (3-x)^2=(pi-x)^2
but you can only go
|3-x| = |pi-x| from that, which is still correct.
In this case, it is
(3-x) = - (pi-x)

[Anonymous No.2230285]

Submit it to fox as proof scientist are stupid and global warming is a lie.

[Anonymous No.2230286]

>>2230276

No square root, it's a logical implication, if x^2 = y^2 then x must equal y. But yeah, >>2230278 still stands

[Anonymous No.2230296]

>>2230276

You're the retard if the first line wasnt enough for you to see why the whole reasoning is wrong.

[Anonymous No.2230316]

>>2230296
The first line is a let statement, the subsequent lines are operations done to it.
"If x = (pi+3)/2, then 2x = (pi+3)"

[Anonymous No.2230317]

9 - 6x + x^2 != (3-x)^2
That's -x^2 - 6x + 9, or 9 + 6x - x^2

[Anonymous No.2230330]

>>2230317
Someone doesn't know how to FOIL

[Anonymous No.2230333]

>>2230317

I see someone hasn't passed algebra 1 yet

pro tip; When you foil you use the sign as well and neg x neg = pos

[Anonymous No.2230336]

>>2230286
(-1)^2 = 1^2 => -1 = 1.

[Anonymous No.2230337]

> if x^2 = y^2 then x must equal y

um... no

[Anonymous No.2230341]

>>2230316

No, its supposedly an equality, pi is pi, whose value is known, so its just x=something and no further operation are needed

[Anonymous No.2230343]

>>2230274
This guy was right, why are we still discussing this.

We've seen another troll math almost the same as this one.
5^2 = (-5)^2
Thus, 5 = -5

[Anonymous No.2230363]

>>2230237
Fucking fuck I can do wonderfully at calculus but I can't fucking add or FOIL in my head. Stupid brain.

[Anonymous No.2230396]

(-1)^2 = 1^2 => -1 = 1

Why make it so unnecessary long?
Oh I see, to troll stupid idiots like these:
>>2230259
>>2230278
>>2230286

[Anonymous No.2230407]

lol nice trollin OP
i wasted like 5 minutes till i see that everything is correct in the picture and pi was just a lucky variable (it's not the pi that refers to circles)

[Anonymous No.2230422]

>>2230407
please kill yourself,

[Anonymous No.2230459]

I haven't seen a convincing one yet. It's always some 3rd grader error which extremely easy to spot.

[Anonymous No.2230472]

>>2230459
>implying that most people learn about pi and factoring and FOILing before 7th/8th grade

[Anonymous No.2230485]

>>2230472
>FOILing
Actually had to look that up. Lulz, you Americans feel the need to give this task an extra name?
Fucking inbred niggers. It follows directly from the distributive law which works in every ring. Jesus Christ..

[Anonymous No.2230487]

I hate this fucking board.

[Anonymous No.2230502]

>>2230237
Pi is not a variable.
Troll score: 0/10
Idiot score: 10/10

[Anonymous No.2230526]

>>2230485
All of the UK uses it too.

[Tautoulogic No.2230532]

>>2230459

[monobrow !!8rXhN1W8bI7 No.2230553]

π = 2*x-3

[Anonymous No.2230611]

>>2230330
True. Whether OP factored the quadratic as (x-3)(x-3) or (3-x)(3-x) doesn't matter, because when foiled, they both come out as x^2-6x+9

[Anonymous No.2230663]

[Anonymous No.2230693]

>impling that <span class="math">a^2=b^2[/spoiler] implies a=b

[Anonymous No.2230702]

What the shit is it with you idiots? Fucking "FOIL".. Never heard of that shit. It's called the distributive law, why do you need to have a stupid method which says exactly in what order to do what? It's fucking retarded.

(x+y)(a+b) = x(a+b) + y(a+b) = xa + xb + ya + yb
or equivalently with the right-distributive law:
(x+y)(a+b) = (x+y)a + (x+y)b = xa + ya + xb + yb

It's the distributive law used two times. What, too hard for you to use it MORE THAN ONCE?
Fucking idiots.

[Anonymous No.2231017]

OP here
>>2230702
Or I could just use a simple visual trick to do most of the work in my head. That's what FOIL is.
Also, teaching 13 year olds about distributing entire quanities is harder than teaching FOIL, I've tried it.
.>>2230663
Anyways, my buddy from work posted this on my Facebook wall to see if I could come up with a reason for why it doesn't work. The best I could do is that (3-x) = -(pi-x) and (3-x) != (pi-x). But what he and I are confused about is why the negative case works and the positive one becomes a contradiction. (Actually, I think he knows why, I just don't want to ask him yet since I'm the one being challenged).

[Anonymous No.2231046]

never heard of foil, is it some nigger math taught in nigger africa?

[Anonymous No.2231052]

>>2231017
because not all shit works when you bring roots into the equation. solve for x and you'll see

[Anonymous No.2231061]

>>2231017
the square root of 3-x (which you do in one of the last steps) is imaginary, so shit gets fucked.

[Anonymous No.2231076]

good troll OP

plenty of distractions to hide the fallacy. like "pi isn't a variable". FOIL hurrdurr

when real troll is a^2 = b^2 => a = b

which is obviously not case when one of a or b is negative

[Anonymous No.2231080]

>>2231061
>>2231061
>>2231061

This. it is given in the start that x > 3, so taking the square root from thirds last to last is wrong.
Otherwise it doesnt matter. subitute 3.1 for pi and it still "works". no one says its a variable.

[Anonymous No.2231106]

>>2231080
>>2231061
retards

nowhere is this square root taken. see posts
>>2230693
>>2231076

[Anonymous No.2231126]

>>2231106

a^2 = b^2 implies a = b if a,b>0
which is exactly why this fails. faggot.

[Anonymous No.2231143]

>>2231126
not sure why you are quoting me, as i agree entirely and posted as such

lrn2 read perhaps

[Anonymous No.2231151]

>>2231106
It's implied that it is.

And if the idiot who made the "proof" was logically implying that the two were equal, then he should have.

[Anonymous No.2231153]

earlier, you multiply both sides by pi - 3. If pi = 3, you are dividing by 0.

[Anonymous No.2231186]

Oh god I laughed so fucking hard at the FOIL thing.

[Anonymous No.2231189]

>>2231017
there are four possible outcomes from this point on, but only 2 different answers, pi1 = 2x-3 and pi2 = 3

the third line in the image
2x(pi-3) = (pi+3)(pi-3)
you multiply both sides by a number
now look what happens if the numbers happens to be 0
the whole operation downwards looses sense, so we define that pi must be different from 3 to have a solution that makes sense

the main thing to note is that x is not the variable
pi is our variable and we use it to multiply on the 3rd line so we have to make sure that pi-3 != 0

[Anonymous No.2231208]

>>2231153
It doesn't equal 3, it equals pi.
Define "x" as (3.14159... +3)/2 or 3.0708
therefore, 2x = pi + 3
2x((pi-3) = (pi+3)(pi-3) and so forth.

Any mistake that leads to the contradiction is purely algebraic, and not a logical fallacy. It works for one case after the square root, but not the other, and the proof happens to use THAT one.

>>2231061
This would make loads of sense.

[Anonymous No.2231205]

>>2231151
nope

sqrt(3-x) or sqrt(pi-x) does not occur in proof and their is no need to say "imaginary numbers herp derp" as in >>2231061

what is implied, and is incorrect, is that sqrt[(3-x)^2] = 3-x and sqrt[(pi-x)^2] = pi-x. related but different

[Anonymous No.2231209]

<div class="math">a^2 = b^2 \Rightarrow |a| = |b|.</div>
Stop this other bullshit.

[Anonymous No.2231394]

>>2230502

LOL yes, idiot score 10 for your post. So ownt. Bet now you're embarrassed of your post.
what these guys said:

>>2231076

>>2231061

[Anonymous No.2231450]

>>2231394
Why would I be embarrassed? I posted it to see what you guys said.