/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5487455]

4 = 2 * 2 = -1 * -2 * √4 = -1 * √(-2)2*4 = -1 * √16 = -4

Why are we made this way?

[Anonymous No.5487465]

holy fuck a real math pedo

LOL GUYS GET IN HERE

[Anonymous No.5487467]

64 / 16

Cancel the 6's.

You get 4.

Why are we made this way?

[sage No.5487471]

>>5487455
<span class="math"> -1\cdot -2\sqrt{4} \ne -1 \cdot \sqrt{-2(2)4} [/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.5487474]

>>5487455
<div class="math">\sqrt{-2\cdot 2\cdot 4} \neq \sqrt{16}</div>

[Anonymous No.5488612]

Did OP breake math?

[Anonymous No.5488621]

s=1+2+4+8+16+...
s-1=2+4+8+16+...
s-1=2(1+2+4+8+...)
s-1=2s
s=-1

[Anonymous No.5488653]

>>5488621
I guess this is why they came up with Occams Razor?

That being said, everything is still in question when OR is not considered absolute :/

[Anonymous No.5488659]

>root of a negative number giving a real answer

Oh shit nigga

[Anonymous No.5488668]

>>5488621
Arithmetically, the first lines implies that s is infinity. Once you are dealing with infinity, arithmetic breaks down. It's the same as all of those similar examples that trick the reader with the use of zero.

[Anonymous No.5488675]

>>5488621
>treating infinity like a subset of standard real number system
>using arithmetic with infinity
>any year

[Anonymous No.5488684]

>>5488675
> being so mad you can't even tell that this is a p-adic integer

[Anonymous No.5488695]

>>5488659
lrn2Order of Operations.

[Anonymous No.5488729]

>>5487455
(16)^1/2 is both 4 and -4.

[Anonymous No.5488743]

>>5488729
>5488729
but (-16)^(1/2) isn't 4

[Anonymous No.5490373]

>>5487455