I need a proof that -1 DOES NOT equal 1

  • Thread starter anis91
  • Start date
  • #1
5
0

Main Question or Discussion Point

hey everybody, once i saw a thread here (didn't want to revive it) about an equation that proves that 1=-1, it was proved wrong ofc, but at the end, someone posted this:

" -1=(-1)^1
=(-1)^2*1/2
=[(-1)^2]^1/2
=(1)^1/2
=√1
=1 "
yet no one replied to it, can someone show me which is the "trippy" step here? the one that misuses an algebra rule? (e.g. a rule that can only be applied to positive numbers etc..."

thank you.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Office_Shredder
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,750
99
We get this question a lot, there's actually a thread in the FAQ devoted to answering questions like it

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=637214 [Broken]

The main point is that whne you write
[tex] \left( -1 \right)^{2/2} = \left( (-1)^2 \right)^{1/2} [/tex]
you have performed an operation which is not actually valid. Taking exponents of negative numbers is tricky and you have to be more careful than when you are working with exponents of positive numbers. In general
[tex] x^{ab} =\left( x^{a} \right)^{b} [/tex]
is something that can only be applied when x is a positive number.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
5
0
okay thanks alot! i appreciate it! ^^
 
  • #4
654
2
We get this question a lot, there's actually a thread in the FAQ devoted to answering questions like it

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=637214 [Broken]

The main point is that whne you write
[tex] \left( -1 \right)^{2/2} = \left( (-1)^2 \right)^{1/2} [/tex]
you have performed an operation which is not actually valid. Taking exponents of negative numbers is tricky and you have to be more careful than when you are working with exponents of positive numbers. In general
[tex] x^{ab} =\left( x^{a} \right)^{b} [/tex]
is something that can only be applied when x is a positive number.
hello office_shredder,

may i know why the indices rule is invalid for negative numbers? i tried for example, (-2^6) and split them up to [-2^(2*3)] = 4^3 and i still yielded 64.

where does taking exponents of negative numbers breakdown?

thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
33,714
5,412
hello office_shredder,

may i know why the indices rule is invalid for negative numbers? i tried for example, (-2^6) and split them up to [-2^(2*3)] = 4^3 and i still yielded 64.
No it doesn't. The parentheses you have in (-2^6) don't do anything and might as well not be there. (-2^6) is exactly the same as -2^6 which is the same as -(2^6) or -64.

If you want to raise -2 to the 6th power, you have to write it as (-2)^6.
where does taking exponents of negative numbers breakdown?
It breaks down when the exponent is fractional and represents an even root (i.e., square root, fourth root, and so on). There is no problem when the exponent is an integer unless you happen to be taking 0 to a negative power.
 
  • #6
654
2
No it doesn't. The parentheses you have in (-2^6) don't do anything and might as well not be there. (-2^6) is exactly the same as -2^6 which is the same as -(2^6) or -64.

If you want to raise -2 to the 6th power, you have to write it as (-2)^6.
It breaks down when the exponent is fractional and represents an even root (i.e., square root, fourth root, and so on). There is no problem when the exponent is an integer unless you happen to be taking 0 to a negative power.
yes that was sloppy of me :D

anyway, is the even root fractional exponent the only case whereby this rule breaks down ?
 
  • #7
33,714
5,412
anyway, is the even root fractional exponent the only case whereby this rule breaks down ?
Yes, since odd roots (cube root, fifth root, and so on) can have negative arguments. For example, ##\sqrt[3]{-27} = -3## and ##\sqrt[5]{-32} = -2##.

If you have an expression such as (-27)2/3, you can write it either as [(-27)2]1/3 or as [(-27)1/3]2, both of which are equal to 9.

The first expression simplifies to (729)1/3 = 9, and the second expression simplifies to (-3)2, which is also 9.
 
  • #8
552
18
It'd be cooler if someone managed to "prove" that i=√1
 
  • #9
654
2
Yes, since odd roots (cube root, fifth root, and so on) can have negative arguments. For example, ##\sqrt[3]{-27} = -3## and ##\sqrt[5]{-32} = -2##.

If you have an expression such as (-27)2/3, you can write it either as [(-27)2]1/3 or as [(-27)1/3]2, both of which are equal to 9.

The first expression simplifies to (729)1/3 = 9, and the second expression simplifies to (-3)2, which is also 9.
that was very insightful, thank you
 
  • #10
10
1
It'd be cooler if someone managed to "prove" that i=√1
I won't try that, but I thought of this yesterday (breaking the same rule as above):

Start with:
[itex]\sqrt{x}[/itex]
Now to factor out a -1:
[itex]=i\sqrt{-x}[/itex]
And to factor out another -1:
[itex]=i*i\sqrt{x}[/itex]
[itex]=-\sqrt{x}[/itex]

[itex]\Rightarrow \sqrt{x}=-\sqrt{x}[/itex]

:P The issue is that even functions are not 1-1, meaning they can map multiple inputs to the same output. Naturally, the inverse function would have to map backwards, but it would have to be split off to multiple values. That is why, for example, [itex]\sqrt{9}=\{3,-3\}[/itex]
 
  • #11
jbriggs444
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
2019 Award
8,896
3,639
That is why, for example, [itex]\sqrt{9}=\{3,-3\}[/itex]
It is a standard notational convention that [itex]\sqrt{x}[/itex] where x is a non-negative real number always refers to the positive root.
 
  • #12
hilbert2
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
1,409
445
i need a proof that -1 DOES NOT equal 1
If you want a rigorous proof for this kind of statements, you need to use the axioms of real numbers: http://math.berkeley.edu/~talaska/h1b/axioms-real-numbers.pdf [Broken] .

First you add ##1## to both sides of the equation ##1=-1## and get ##1+1=0##. Next you use the order axioms to show that ##1+1>1>0##, which is a contradiction and proves that ##1## can't equal ##-1## (for real numbers ##a## and ##b##, the inequalities ##a>b## and ##a=b## can't both be true).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
1,331
45
I won't try that, but I thought of this yesterday (breaking the same rule as above):

Start with:
[itex]\sqrt{x}[/itex]
Now to factor out a -1:
[itex]=i\sqrt{-x}[/itex]
And to factor out another -1:
[itex]=i*i\sqrt{x}[/itex]
[itex]=-\sqrt{x}[/itex]

[itex]\Rightarrow \sqrt{x}=-\sqrt{x}[/itex]

:P The issue is that even functions are not 1-1, meaning they can map multiple inputs to the same output. Naturally, the inverse function would have to map backwards, but it would have to be split off to multiple values. That is why, for example, [itex]\sqrt{9}=\{3,-3\}[/itex]
√9 is 3, √9 is not -3, and √x is a mapping from one real to precisely oneother real; a function.
 
  • #14
10
1
√9 is 3, √9 is not -3, and √x is a mapping from one real to precisely oneother real; a function.
I know, I should have been more clear by being more confusing :P I was using √ to represent the function that, given the output of f(x)=x2, would return x. When I was working on a little project dealing with sine and cosine, I would often have a function squared on one side, where the otherside, after taking the square root, was indeed negative and the positive square root would cause the fully reduced form to fail.
 

Related Threads on I need a proof that -1 DOES NOT equal 1

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
984
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
19K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
65
Views
27K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
890
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
622
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Top