I feel like a dunce. I can't find the error

  • Thread starter Thread starter mrspeedybob
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In line 7, B - C - A = 0. The equation A*0 = B*0 does not imply that A = B.
 
The use of A, B and C is to obfuscate what is going on. If you substitute in the values, it is obvious.

Line 7:
A(B-C-A) = B (B-C-A)
He then divided by B-C-A.

But B-C-A = 0, and so Line 7 is nothing more than
4 \times 0 = 5 \times 0
 
I see.
So the lesson learned here is that when deviding both sides of an equation by anything the resulting equation is only valid where that thing ≠0
Thanks.
 
mrspeedybob said:
I see.
So the lesson learned here is that when deviding both sides of an equation by anything the resulting equation is only valid where that thing ≠0
Thanks.
A shorter way of saying that is that you can't divide both sides of an equation by zero.
 
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...
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Back
Top