Explaining "If a=1 and b=1: then a squared - 1...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Byrgg
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around a mathematical error involving the manipulation of equations where a and b are both set to 1. The critical mistake occurs when dividing by (a - 1), which equals zero, leading to the incorrect conclusion that 2 equals 1. Participants clarify that dividing by zero is undefined, making the reasoning flawed. A simpler example is provided to illustrate the same principle, emphasizing the importance of recognizing when division by zero occurs. The conversation highlights the distinction between mathematical errors and humorous misconceptions.
Byrgg
Messages
335
Reaction score
0
On another forum, someone had this in a sig:

If a=1 and b=1: then a squared - 1 = ab-b: then (a + 1)(a - 1) = b(a - 1):then a + 1 = b: thus 1 + 1 = 1: as a result 2 = 1

I couldn't follow all of it, could someone explain this to me?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In the step, (a+1)(a-1) = (b)(a-1), one "cancels" the a-1, which in this case in the same as cancelling zero on both sides. You can't cancel zero because, a.0 = b.0 doesn't necessarily mean that a = b.
 
You couldn't follow the work or you don't understand why it works that way?

Here's the work:

a=b=1

a*a-1=a*b-b [since a=b=1]
(a+1)(a-1)=b(a-1) [factoring the right-hand side and factoring a b out of the left-hand side]
a+1=b dividing both sides by a-1[/color]
1+1=1
2=1

The problem is with the line I highlighted in red. You are dividing by a-1, but since a=1 you are actually dividing by zero, which is not defined.

Here's a simpler one to make it easier to see:

5*0=3*0
5=3 ["divide both sides by 0"] - obviously 5 does not equal 3.
 
Oh, ok so they're telling lies sorry I forgot about the division by 0, now I have to go tell them how wrong they are. Thanks.
 
There is a difference between a "lie" and a "joke".
 
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top