Topic awaiting preservation: Why? (Page 1 of 2)

That's always the big question isn;t it. Well...lets see who can answer the why questions around here.

I have a doozy for you to start off with.

1+1=2...why?

why does 1+1=2?

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

I don't even know what to say, except that's an interesting question. I suppose if my brain were actually working now I would be able to attempt a reply.... As it is, it reminds me of a Korean comedy show they have on Sunday nights. It's basically skit comedy, and in one piece (which is pretty lame, actually), two couples (guy + girl) come out and ask questions like, "Why is the sky blue?" The answers follow the format of "Because it would be pretty strange if it were..." and involve a play on words (thus making them very difficult to translate; I take that back--impossible to translate).

[Edit: Ugh. That was a very lame explanation. I can't believe I made that piece sound even less funny than it actually is--I didn't think that was possible.]

[This message has been edited by Suho1004 (edited 06-24-2002).]

First thing I thought of when I read the subject was..
"Why not?"
Then you had to go and make it complicated! *sighs*

Because 1 is the loneliest number.

Do a google search...I'm sure you will find the mathematical proof...

Skaarjj: It doesn't. I knew quite a few maths students at Uni and one of the first lessons they had was proving that 1+1 didn't = 2. I wasn't really interested in the explanation but I thought it was an interesting device to engage people in some pretty serious mathemetics (all you know is wrong )

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Unless you take the Ogie approach, that 1+1=3

1 man + 1 woman = 1 child,

therefore,

1+1=3.

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

define "+"

Suho is sort of right =)

See, 1+1=2 is a mathematical statement that is based on even simpler concepts that we consider to be "true". These concepts are things that are so simple that you'd have a hard time finding someone who disagrees with them. Stuff like, if I put something in my hand, close my hand, and open my hand, it will still be there. Incredibly simple concepts.

If you consider these basic fundamental ideas to be "true", then you should also believe that all of mathematics, including everything from 1+1=2 to calculus and beyond, is also true. This is because everything "proven" in math is based off of something that is based off of something that is based off of these fundamental principles.

But if you consider them to be false, then 1+1 may not equal 2 in your opinion.

So, my basic response to "why" is "because it's based off of something simpler that we agree to be true."

Of course, it can be explained mathematically...but basically says the same thing as Slime has said...albeit mathematically...

Ok, this shouldn't be to difficult.

So, why does 1+1=2?

Say you have one apple in your right hand and one apple in your left hand. You add the apple from your left hand into your right hand and you now have two apples in your right hand. So, therefore 1 apple + 1 apple = 2 apples,
or 1+1=2. So, therefore 1+1=2 is a fact. I don't know what you guys are talking about, and any math equation that can prove it is not true, is changing the basic rules of math, and is therefor false. Or fake math, like fools gold.

Simple enough.

Next question please.

-^^-
--::--
\___/

quote:

---

I don't know what you guys are talking about, and any math equation that can prove it is not true, is changing the basic rules of math, and is therefor false.

---

That's exactly the point, isn't it? According to the basic rules of math, it is true. What Slime was saying (and what I was referring to in my c l i n t o n-esque manner) is that it might not be true if you don't follow those basic rules. And the original question of "why is it true" is essentially calling those rules into question. Or at least that's the way I saw it...

This is really rather simple and has little to do with mathematics. The reason that 1 + 1 = 2 is because that is how we define 2. Without putting one object and one object together, we would never have needed a name for two objects. But we did and we chose to call it 2. So, 2 is merely an arbitrary designation for more than one but less than three whole objects.

why? because

. . : slicePuzzle

I agree with what St. Seneca is saying. It is all to do with the English language. It all depends on definition. What does plus mean? What does 2 mean? I would say this of course because I have a biased predisposition to English rather than Math. God I hate it!

-=Luxo Jr.=-

Doin' wierdassed animations since 1986

But then 2 could be 1 apple and 1 apple and hlaf an apple...that's more than one and less than three

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

are the first "numbers" in the alphanumeric hex

you take I and then you add an I and you have II

I + I = II

1(1 number representing 1 thing) + 1(same as on left) = 2(a 1 and a 1 combined forming 2 quantities)

skaarjj this isn't rocket science, its obvious to a child that 1 + 1 = 2

1 man + 1 women = 2 people (1 man and 1 women)

and = +
difference = -
of = x
out of/ to = ?/?

the words that represent the basic math operations in a statement

now please, accept the fact that 1 quantity and 1 quantity = 2 whole quantities


___________________
tri-eye

1+1=2 is based on Peano's axiomatization of natural numbers.
do a google search...

however, anyone could give a new axiomatization and have an EQUALLY valid equation like
1+1=3.

1+1=3 being based on 1 man + 1 woman = 3 through the process of impregnation, a successful gestation, and a successful birth takes a *lot* of things for granted about the physical condition of all 3 people involved, and therefore has no real mathematical basis. More of an overagrandized philosophical basis that jackasses world wide like to sit and verbally masturbate with.

1+1=2.

and.......why has little to do with it.

No

1+1=1

One mass combined with another mass is still one mass but bigger.
(take one haystack and dump another one on top. You still just got one haystack )

Nimraw we are talking about addition in the mathmatical principle not subatomic contraction. Please this is really pissing me off, DL had it down, 1 + 1 = 2 there is no why.

Now about the stupid haystacks. Take 1 stack and another stack and you have 2 stacks. No movement involved.

Look its quite simple

quote:

---

1(quantity of) + 1(quantity of) = 2(quantities of)

---

Enough said.


___________________
tri-eye

and if it pisses you off...good for you. Be pissed off. I did not say this as a philosophical point of view, asking why is the sky blue (I know htat one) or any such question like that...it was asked as a lighteneing question. This place gets heavy sometime...a question in which everyone can present their point of view and still be equally right is a good thing for this place...but anyway...no one else is taking this too seriously, why do you have to be the one?

quote:

---

Nimraw we are talking about addition in the mathmatical principle not subatomic contraction

---

I'm sorry..I didn't know that if you put one haystock on top of another every piece of hay fused together and formed one large, stack-shaped piece of hay. Obviously we mnust bow down to such well thought out reasoning such as:

quote:

---

Now about the stupid haystacks. Take 1 stack and another stack and you have 2 stacks. No movement involved.

---

Come off it. Can you honestly be so dense as to not be able to see the difference between just having two stacks of hay adn adding two stacks of hay? The very basis of adding something means that you combine the said things. If this was not the case, then 1+1 would equal 1 1...no movement involved.

Besides Insider...he was making a joke

GET OVER YOURSELF.

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

[This message has been edited by Skaarjj (edited 07-01-2002).]

now... the way i see the hay stack is: 1 = 2 (take a hay stack and seperate it into 2 piles)

And if that is true then 1 + 1 could NOT = 2 because 1 already = 2.

Izzay

Ohhhhh...harsh

-=Luxo Jr.=-

Doin' wierdassed animations since 1986

thats division, 1/2 = .5

skaarjj!!!! look!!!!!

theres a 1



and heres a 1

i count 2 ones


___________________
tri-eye

But that's counting Insider...that's not addition. All you have is still 1 and 1, two ones, not one two

It's like doing a recipe. If you were told to add the flour to the eggs, would you put one next to the other and congratulate yourself on a job well done? I don't think so.

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

[This message has been edited by Skaarjj (edited 07-02-2002).]

I just was thinking about how in coding the first thing, what you and i would call 1 is really 0.

so: 1 + 1 = 0 because 1 = 0... for what its worth.

                                                           

Which in turn, would make 1/1 = undefined.. Too much non-mathematical thought here! *heads back to the PS forum*

Bugger this! Too much crapping on and smartarseness!

**Toddles off to the 3d and Animation forum***

-=Luxo Jr.=-

Doin' wierdassed animations since 1986

But 1+1 = 2
is some times false
1 pile of chips + 1 piles of chips = 1 big pile of chips
get my drift? so but if it's not material then there's no way 1+1 cant = 2

i think we covered that with the Haystack business...but I agree with you, except on the question that in put mathematical terms, 1+1 must equal two, after all, what defines one?

Or, more specifically...who?

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

IMHO, numbers just specify a quantity, such as X and N etc in Algebra. One equals a quantity that you can define, but it always changes depending on what the object(s) are/is. Such as 1 jumbo jet liner, or 1 Big Mac, or 1 Computer etc...And since one is a quantity that is defined by what you are measuring, then something such as 1 haystack + 1 haystack would equal two of those one haystacks. The same applys to (well...hmmm...thats it) cooking: If I need 2 pound of sugar, but only have a 1 pound measuring cup, then I would have to add 1 pound of sugar to another pound of sugar, and I would get 2 pounds of sugar. Thats just my take on math though...

hang on but mabye
1 was defined before any histrorical documents where made
there for no one knows
and people have just learnt to except it because it makes life easier
think what chaos life would be with out a simple thing as the Number 1

Yeah, without Nr. 2, SB wouldn't have a nickname...hehe...

Indeed we wouldn't...but this doesnt answer the question...who is truly qualified to define 1, 2, 3, etc.?

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

Ok wait a minute, I'd say that it all depends upon 2 things, this is my mathatical proof for 1 + 1 = 2

1 + 1 = 2 providing the two quantities are the same type of thing and? or? (both kind of...) and providing that 1 and 1 are equal, we can say that they equal 2.

Examples:
1 person and 1 other person give you two people

1 person that's 85 pounds and 1 person that's 200 pounds still gives you two people.

However if you take 1 Lamma and 1 Goat and add them together you still have 1 Lama and 1 Goat.
But if you look at the Lamma and the Goat both as Animals you have 1 Animal and 1 Animal which means when you add them together you have 2 Animals.

Really all addition is is the grouping together of related objects!
Hence you can add (group) anything together as long as you have a basis for grouping them together...

And that doesn't make any sense, I'd suggest taking some Object Oriented Programming....
Study up on abstractions...

*Gee I hope that made a little sense....

Maskkkk




- Face the Present

Is it just me, or is this thread going around in circles?

Suho - I guess that's a nicer way of saying what I was just thinking....


(and of course, that was - 'I just farted...and wasted more brain power than this thread has utilized....' )

DL: Who says that threads need to consume the sum and total of each poster's brain power? Personally Ilike hte occasional thread where what you don't have ot do is psend ages thinking up a reply. But that's just me

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live