Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why're two negs mult pos?

  1. Sep 19, 2005 #1
    Ok, so in discussion today we were talking about combinatonics and counting. We were going over binomial coeffients, and i didn't like the explanation, and i related it to "its like, when you're learning to multiply, and they tell you two negatives equal a positive because when you put one minus sign on top of the other it makes a plus sign." But moving the lines around doesn't actually explain why two negatives equal a positive, its just a conveinient way of learning it so you can do the problems right.

    ...but then someone asked me after class, "why DO two negatives equal a positive?" and i was like "err... cause multiplication is the addition of groups and when you have a negative and you put it into negative groups... Hmmph! i don't actually know dammit!"

    So, i've been chewing it over, and i think i've made some sense thinking about it in terms of negative meaning direction, and multiplying meaning you increase the magnitude... but i dunno.... i want a better explanation. Please.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 19, 2005 #2
    If a and b are two negative integers they can be written as two positive integers c and d such that

    [itex] ab = (-1)c(-1)d = (-1)(-1)cd = 1cd = cd [/tex] where a and c are equal in magnitude, as are b and d.

    edit: itex is prettier.
  4. Sep 19, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Perhaps this may help :smile:
  5. Sep 19, 2005 #4
    but why is neg one times neg one positive? just an identity? is there a better conceptual way to think of it?

    how about some number theory or set theory or something that describes what happens to negative numbers?
  6. Sep 19, 2005 #5
    read the page he sent you.
  7. Sep 19, 2005 #6


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    It contains multiple examples to make it 'understandable' as well as some mathematical details I believe.
  8. Sep 19, 2005 #7
    ya, ok, i guess that works... i have a better question to ask anyway...
  9. Sep 19, 2005 #8
    -1x=opposite of x. -1(-x)=opposite of a negative, a positive.
  10. Sep 19, 2005 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The integers are designed so that they form what is known as a ring. A ring must have (among other things) an additive identity and an additive inverse. The additive identity is the number we call 0, which has the property that 0 + x = x + 0 = x. Next we define the additive inverse of 1 as that element which when added to 1, gives the sum 0, or if x + 1 = 0, then x is the additive inverse of 1. We use the symbol "-1" to represent this number. Next we make use of the distributive property and the definition 0 = 1 + (-1) to write
    0 = 0*(-1) = {1 + (-1)}*(-1) = 1*(-1) + (-1)*(-1)
    Since 1 is the multiplicative identity, we know that 1*x = x*1 = x, for all x, and hence, 1*(-1) = -1. So we have 0 = -1 + (-1)*(-1). But we know that 0 = -1 + 1, therefore, from the uniqueness of addition (-1)*(-1) = 1.

    Note : The operation of subtraction is merely a shorthand for adding a negative number.
  11. Sep 19, 2005 #10
    Or the other way around from the page is to accept the field axioms, then prove yourself that (-1)(-1)=1 using them. You just need to use more precise terms of what a negative refers to and what rules multiplication follows.
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2005
  12. Sep 19, 2005 #11
    We debated this a while back on this thread https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=82997.

    My approch was to use English grammer exmaples to explain why -- = +. Basicly, any negative statment such as "not" or "didnt" counts as a -1.

    [Quote = eNathan]Well that kinda gets into the very logic of what a negative is. Think of it as logic "not" operations. Think about using these in sentences and you will get the idea.

    -1*-1=1 ; No + No = Yes
    1*1=1 ; Yes + Yes = Yes
    -1*1=-1 ; No + Yes = No
    1*-1=-1 ; Yes + No = No

    For instance, if I said...
    I did not not go to the store. That really means, you DID go to the store. -1 * -1 = 1 ; No + No = Yes ... and so forth.

    You kinda see how there is a relationship between mathematics and grammer? lol Im not sure if this is an official way to present it, but I just though it up a while back.[/quote]
  13. Sep 19, 2005 #12


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You've almost got the geometric picture, methinks. It's a nice one, and is important to know when you deal with the complex numbers.

    In the real case, multiplication by a positive means you leave the direction unchanged, and multiplication by a negative means that you flip the direction. So, if you have a negative, and multiply by another negative, the result is a positive.

    In the complex case, numbers can be seen as having a magnitude and a direction in the complex plane. Multiplying by a complex number that lies at an angle θ means rotation by θ. (Angles are measured counterclockwise from the positive x axis)
  14. Sep 20, 2005 #13

    ... multiplication is nothing more than a shorthand for repeated additions and in that light, there's no way to justify -1 * -1 = 1. Despite the convoluted logic the conventional explanation for multiplying two negative numbers amounts to this

    for negatives
    -1^2 = -1 + 2
    -2^2 = -2 + 6
    -3^2 = -3 + 12
    -4^2 = -4 + 20

    whereas for positives
    1^2 = 1 + 0
    2^2 = 2 + 2
    3^2 = 3 + 6
    4^2 = 4 + 12

    So we're supposed to buy the explanation that, through some magical process, the interval between a negative and it's square is always larger then the interval between the positive of the same number and it's square?

    Doesn't smell right.
  15. Sep 20, 2005 #14
    In the sentence examples you stated, the logic follows, but your logic table could also equal this:

    -1*-1=1 ; No + No = Emphatic No
    1*1=1 ; Yes + Yes = Emphatic Yes
    -1*1=-1 ; No + Yes = Terminating Yes
    1*-1=-1 ; Yes + No = Terminating No
  16. Sep 20, 2005 #15


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Well, what is the better question?? We're waiting! :smile:
  17. Sep 20, 2005 #16
    That loses meaning when one looks beyond integers. What does it mean to repeat addition 1/2 times, or Pi times ? i times ?
    If you just want to stay within the integers, you first have to define what a negative integer is. In that case, it is the number that when added to the corresponding positive integer, returns 0 (called the additive inverse). Multiplication defined your way makes sense for positive multiples. A negative multiple would have to be translated to a positive multiple multiplied by -1, in which you would apply your repeated addition definition, then have the negative sign applied. A negative multiplied by a negative gives us the following problem then: (-a)*(-b) = (-1)*(-1)*a*b, so we now have the problem of figuring out (-1)*(-1). Now, we know from our definition that 1 + (-1) = 0, so we have (-1) + (-1)*(-1) = 0. It is easy to prove that each integer has only one additive inverse (uniqueness). Thus, (-1)*(-1) must be the additive inverse of -1, which is 1.
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2005
  18. Sep 21, 2005 #17
    That's because you are not following the rules!

    It would be like me saying,

    1 + 1 = 2 + 0


    2 + 2 = 5 - 1

    And then declaring that I have shown something smells fishy.

    In reality, however, you have established a false opposition. It is not as if
    -1^2 = -1 + 2
    in contrast to
    1^2 = 1 + 0

    To prove it, I could just as easily say:
    -1^2 = 1 + 0
    1^2 = -1 + 2

    The fact is, -1^2 = 1^2

    Why? Because multiplication by -1 is like 180 degree rotation (flipping) -- note that 90 degree rotation would be multiplication by i. Someone has already pointed us in this direction.
  19. Sep 21, 2005 #18


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    For k>0
    neg interval = (-k)2 - (-k) = k2 + k
    pos interval = k2 - k

    So, neg interval = pos interval + 2k, and since k>0, neg interval > pos interval.

    See ? No magic ! No bad smell !
  20. Sep 21, 2005 #19


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I feel the need to comment that -1^2 = -1. Exponents before multiplication.
    :tongue2: (Of course, I know both of you meant (-1)^2)
  21. Sep 21, 2005 #20


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    a) False
    b) Correct, your assertion in a) stinks.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook