- #1
afton
- 6
- 0
Is there a proof that 1+1 = 2 ?
or we just accept it as it is ?
or we just accept it as it is ?
afton said:Is there a proof that 1+1 = 2 ?
or we just accept it as it is ?
FulhamFan3 said:I'm going to answer this question with a question. What are Numbers? What is "one"? What is "two"? When someone answers that I got a simple one line proof to your stupid question.
afton said:Is there a proof that 1+1 = 2 ?
or we just accept it as it is ?
But why is it so? I asked a mathematics professor who wrote
a book on Proof in Mathematics for university students pointed me
to read the Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica.
Somewhere in the 500 pages of axioms and theorems
they're trying to prove by extending Peano postulates that
1+1 = 2.
But in 1931 Kurt Gödel with his Incompleteness Theorem
demonstrated that within any given branch of mathematics, there
would always be some propositions that couldn't be proven either true
or false using the rules and axioms.
roger said:Actually, I have a question..
Can i use physical objects to demonstrate the notion of addition ?
eg 1 apple add 1 apple equals two apples ?
Roger
roger said:Actually, I have a question..
Can i use physical objects to demonstrate the notion of addition ?
eg 1 apple add 1 apple equals two apples ?
Roger
roger said:Actually, I have a question..
Can i use physical objects to demonstrate the notion of addition ?
eg 1 apple add 1 apple equals two apples ?
Roger
matt grime said:The usual "counter argument" goes: I have a cup with a drop of water in it, I add another drop of water to it, then I look inside. How many drops of water are there in the cup
matt grime said:The usual "counter argument" goes: I have a cup with a drop of water in it, I add another drop of water to it, then I look inside. How many drops of water are there in the cup
loseyourname said:Did no one notice Dexter's post about this? If we called a collection of one object and another object three objects, then 1+1=3. The only reason it equals 2 as it stands is because that is what 2 is defined as. In an integer series, each integer is defined as being 1 more than the one it follows (roughly put).
afton said:If we somehow can arrive at a definition of what is 'one' (in which Godel's Incompletness Theorem said we can't)
afton said:Still a circular argument :-) "being one more..." contains "one" in the
sentence. Imho the difficulties is from defining what is 'one'. If we somehow
can arrive at a definition of what is 'one' (in which Godel's Incompletness
Theorem said we can't) proving 1+1=2 would be much easier
loseyour name said:Water is defined as at least one molecule containing two moles of hydrogen and one mole of oxygen.
Therefore, any molecule or collection of molecules containing two moles of hydrogen and one mole of oxygen is water.
FulhamFan3 said:there is no difficulty in defining 1. 1 is defined as an isolated quantity. 2 is defined the whole number quantity after that.
roger said:But why should quantity even enter into the argument ? ( when trying to define 1)
After all quantity is physical, so shouldn't we be able to define 1 purely abstractly, without resorting to physical principles such as a quantity ?
Roger
Numbers can never have an entirely abstract basis.
How would you teach someone to count just using numbers?
They have to represent some sort of quantity whether its a unit of length, area, volume or apples.
Well, there are several things one could mean by "counting" -- if you simply mean naming the terms of the sequence 0, 1, 2, 3, ... in order, then it's fairly straightforward.
FulhamFan3 said:In that case your just telling them to memorize abstract symbols without telling them the meaning. You can do the same with the alphabet but it's useless unless they understand the letters represent sounds in speech.
In that case your just telling them to memorize abstract symbols without telling them the meaning.
You can do the same with the alphabet but it's useless unless they understand the letters represent sounds in speech.
dextercioby said:I'm sorry,pal,this is after all,a science forum and any little/huge mistake must be corrected.
One mole of any substance (obviously,water included) contains exactly [itex] N_{A} [/itex] atoms/molecules,where [itex] N_{A} [/itex] is called "Avogadro's number" and is aproximately equal to [itex] 6.023\cdot 10^{23} [/itex].In the case of water,the molecule has 2 atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of oxygen and one mole of water weighs approximately 18 grams and contains [itex] N_{A} [/itex] molecules.
IIRC,the 'mole' is one of the 7 fundamental units from SI and is defined as the substance quantity corresponding to [itex] N_{A} [/itex] atoms/molecules.
Daniel.
Hurkyl said:But the point still holds -- it can be done.
When I say teach someone to count I mean that they know the meaning of the numbers they are learning.
VietDao29 said:Hi,
I really don't think that it's worth arguing here.
We must accept that the natural numbers are: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...
And, if I had an honor to be the inventor of the natural number, I can make it whatever I like and my descendents just have to accept it. I can make it like:
1, 0, 5, 7, 10, 100, 20,... Or I can even create some more symbol to make different numbers.
Why 1 + 1 = 2 is you look at the array of natural number. Search where the 1 is and simply count from that number 1 more value, and you get 2.
And 2 + 3 = 5. Just do the same...
It's acceptable, and must be accepted, as you cannot do anything to change it.
It's basically correct... as I think.
Viet Dao,
The proof that 1+1 equals 2 is based on the concept of addition, which states that when two quantities are combined, the result is the sum of those quantities. In other words, when we add one unit to another unit, the result is two units, which is represented as 1+1=2.
Yes, there is a mathematical equation that proves 1+1 equals 2. It is known as the Peano Axioms, which are a set of axioms or basic assumptions that form the foundation of arithmetic. One of these axioms states that for any number x, x+1 is a unique number. Using this axiom and the concept of addition, we can prove that 1+1=2.
The concept of 1+1=2 was developed through centuries of mathematical exploration and study. The ancient Greeks and Romans had a basic understanding of addition and its properties, but it was not until the 19th century that mathematicians like Giuseppe Peano and Bertrand Russell formalized the concept of numbers and their relationships, including the proof that 1+1=2.
Yes, 1+1=2 is universally accepted in mathematics. It is considered a fundamental truth and is used as a building block for more complex mathematical concepts. The Peano Axioms, which prove 1+1=2, are also accepted as the foundation of arithmetic by mathematicians around the world.
No, 1+1 can never equal something other than 2. This is because the concept of addition is defined in a way that always results in the sum of the two added quantities. Any deviation from this would contradict the fundamental principles of arithmetic and mathematics as a whole.