July 20th, 2018, 07:12 PM  #21  
Banned Camp Joined: Jul 2018 From: beverly hills Posts: 15 Thanks: 0  Quote:
Except now you just contradicted the entire system and rendered it impossible to do. If math is an absolute, it cannot change the original set of rules and or not apply or use them just because the circumstances change. Those original set of rules PREVENT the numbers from being used any other possible way except the original way they are shown to work. Quote:
The original set of rules set the baseline and foundation for how all those numbers work, They cannot ever be removed, changed, or made to be used in a different way to change the outcome Addition works a very specific way, and multiplication works the exact same way addition does because multiplication IS addition So when you have 5 things to count, both addition and multiplication outright prevent 5, from being anything else, other than 5. So for people to try to saying 5 can become 6, because of some counting manipulation, then they have literally just removed both addition and multiplication completely from the problem, and instead are now just doing whatever they feel like in order to get it to work how THEY want it to even though the system's rules say they're wrong. I got news for people because how the baseline foundation and rules of addition and multiplication are set up, then there is absolutely no possible way that the system itself will ever allow 5 things to be as 6 because of manipulating the way those 5 things are counted. I have a formula that makes 1+1=3, So I guess that makes it 3 right.. Hey, I manipulated the system to make it fit, the same exact way that people are manipulating 5 things to become 6.... I really am; however, if I presented that and broke it all down in detail showing exactly how it was done, all anyone here would do is tell me it doesn't work like that, but yet you're all saying it does work like that on what you're trying to use it on. If the math system prevents 1+1 from ever equaling 3 because the outcome was manipulated, then the math system will also prevent 5 form ever becoming 6 through manipulation as well. Last edited by skipjack; July 20th, 2018 at 11:41 PM.  
July 20th, 2018, 07:20 PM  #22  
Math Team Joined: May 2013 From: The Astral plane Posts: 2,041 Thanks: 815 Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timeywimey stuff.  Quote:
Look at it this way. It's 9 AM and you have an important meeting 4 hours from now. Is your appointment at 13 AM or 1 PM? (Rewrite the problem for military time.) If you think it's 1 PM then you've just done 9 + 4 = 1. No, it's not "normal" addition, but the point is that it follows clear rules and can be useful. We aren't saying that it's 2 + 3 = 5, we're saying it's something else. As long as we are clear on that point what's the problem? Dan  
July 20th, 2018, 07:25 PM  #23  
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 2,157 Thanks: 631  Quote:
So you have just given a perfectly sensible demonstration of the fact that math is not absolute. I most heartily agree. Now I would like to know in a few words why this fact troubles you. After all, you just proved it! You could put your name on the discovery. By the way that happens a lot in math and in science. You set out to find the luminiferous aether, and instead you discover there is no luminiferous aether and a revolution in physics happens. You believe that math is absolute, but math is manifestly not absolute, as you so capably demonstrated. You proved the opposite of what you originally believed. You should be thrilled. You learned something! For that matter, what do you mean exactly by absolute? Perhaps if you gave a definition we could talk about it. Last edited by Maschke; July 20th, 2018 at 07:29 PM.  
July 20th, 2018, 07:29 PM  #24 
Banned Camp Joined: Jul 2018 From: beverly hills Posts: 15 Thanks: 0 
I have a formula that makes 1+1=3, So I guess that makes it 3 right... Hey, I manipulated the system to make it fit, the same exact way that people are manipulating 5 things to become 6.... I really am, however if I presented that and broke it all down in detail showing exactly how it was done, all anyone here would do is tell me it doesn't work like that, but yet you're all saying it does work like that on what you're trying to use it on. If the math system prevents 1+1 from ever equaling 3 because the outcome was manipulated, then the math system will also prevent 5 from ever becoming 6 through manipulation as well. It either works all around or it doesn't; it cannot just work whenever you feel like having it work. In the case of diagram 1 the rectangle. The number 3 is present and so is the number 2. When making a rectangle, the only possible way for the diagram to be set up is like this: ... . . There are only a total of 5 things to count either 3 across and 2 down, or 3 down and 2 across. Anyone that wants to argue about this being multiplication is not going to remove the rules of how multiplication works and MUST be done according to the math system. If there are only 5 things to count, the answer is 5. Under how multiplication works, the only possible way for the answer on this to be 6, is when there are already 6 actual things present you can count right from the start. You cannot make up a digit that does not exist and then include it in the problem, as multiplication doesn't allow that. There must already be have/need Either two groups of 3, or three groups of 2 right from the beginning. If there are only 5 things to count to start with, then that's the number you work with, you do not get to make up an imaginary 6th unit by manipulating how those 5 things get counted, and then say it's 6. The amount shown is the total; saying it's 6 doesn't change the amount from 5 to 6. So the answer is 5, and there isn't a single person on the face of this planet that is going to say it's 6 without there being 6 actual things to count from the start. Anyone that says the answer is anything except 5 is wrong, and refuses to use REAL multiplication and addition and I'm not going to reply to you any further. I'm tired of people saying a system has rules, then not following them while saying they are. If something is the color green, then it's green; to say it's blue (while it's still green) without actually changing the color itself to blue, then it's green, and no amount of manipulation tactics are ever going to change that. And everyone pulls the same stunt with math, they claim there is a set up rules (Green), then say the rules are the same (Green) while going ahead and doing something that the rules won't allow (people are saying it's BLUE without changing the color itself) through manipulation, while saying they are using the rules (Green while saying it's blue). The entire math system is completely broken and not doable in condition people have created. no one can even apply the basics. Last edited by skipjack; August 27th, 2018 at 11:27 AM. 
July 20th, 2018, 10:04 PM  #25  
Banned Camp Joined: Jul 2018 From: beverly hills Posts: 15 Thanks: 0  Quote:
And you cannot use military time outside of the military to justify what your'e saying. On top of that, military time in itself does not work either. Despite is it's 24 hour cycle, the actual times military time uses will not allow it to work the way humans manipulated it to do. There is a difference in basic math principles and rules, and the way man uses their own false logic to force the numbers to fit without actually using the numbers. Case in point, military time never hits the 24:00 mark despite it's written around 24:00, in reality military time hits 23:59:59 and then resets to 0:00, what man did was rounded that number up to 24 and then never actually use the number 24 to attempt to use a 24 hour time frame without 24 hours is absurd. Bottom line is that if there aren't 24 actual hours, it is impossible to design the framework around it and have it work. Human thinking against math doesn't work, never has, and never will and that is the major problem with this whole aspect of math in genial, everyone is saying math has rules then creating semantic arguments to justify not using the actual numbers they say the baseline uses. If certain numbers are going to be used to establish a baseline, then those must be used throughout the entire process no matter what, or the system itself isn't being used, mans just making up numbers that aren't part of the equation, and then designing the equation around the number they made up, instead of using the numbers themselves from the baseline rules to do the equation. This is the exact same thing as there is a math problem that uses the numbers 116, without the number 12. Humans would start applying their own logic and coming up with all sorts of ways to have the problem be worked around what they came up with, such as it doesn't need the number 12 to be 116 because everyone knows the sequential order of numbers from 116 it's used like that in this example, and all sorts of other BS, instead of accepting 12 is missing and the problem cannot be done because the numbers the system gives them, would make the problem unsolvable. You cannot ignore that 116 must include 12, while totally ignoring that it's not 116 without the 12 being present in the line and lying about how this problem follows different rules. Last edited by Matt C; July 20th, 2018 at 10:17 PM.  
July 20th, 2018, 10:54 PM  #26  
Senior Member Joined: Sep 2016 From: USA Posts: 558 Thanks: 323 Math Focus: Dynamical systems, analytic function theory, numerics  Quote:
BTW, 2x3 is not always equal to 6. For instance in $\mathbb{Z}_5$, you have 2x3 = 1. But I'm sure you know better.  
July 21st, 2018, 12:44 AM  #27  
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,293 Thanks: 1968  Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Did you mean to type "in general" rather than "in genial? If so, what are the things you had in mind that aren't in that general category? I don't know what that ungrammatical clause is intended to mean. Can you try to check that what you type makes sense? Note that "military times" number the hours of the day from zero to 23, so 24 numbers are used, but "24" isn't needed as an hour number. Last edited by skipjack; August 27th, 2018 at 11:32 AM.  
July 21st, 2018, 01:04 AM  #28 
Newbie Joined: Jul 2018 From: fdsfds Posts: 1 Thanks: 0 
a) "2 x 3 = x" makes sense in math. b) "x = 5" makes sense in math. c) Therefore, "2 x 3 = 5" also necessarily makes sense in math. d) However, 2 x 3 = 6 As you can see, the problem is with numbers themselves because 5 = 6. 
July 21st, 2018, 03:40 AM  #29  
Senior Member Joined: Jun 2015 From: England Posts: 891 Thanks: 269  Quote:
Your own diagram gives the lie to your rubbish, right from the outset. Your diagram is not, as you state, a diagram of the area covered by the calculation 3 x 2 in dots. There are 5 dots in this diagram and there should only be 4 to cover the area in a dot diagram. Your diagram actually covers the calculation 3 x 3 To calculate the area (as required in the emboldened section of your post) your diagram should look like this … . You think of the second line as equivalent to the ditto marks construction in English. So this would give you a first line, of 3 A second line of 3 But not a third line, which is just plain wrong. I present in this way because you have been belligerent and contemptuous towards others throughout this thread, right from the very start. You could have chosen the path of cooperation instead of confrontation and said something along the line of "Here is something that seems to me inconsistent with these rules.....What do you think?" It is a calculation. Last edited by skipjack; July 21st, 2018 at 06:44 AM.  
July 21st, 2018, 05:30 AM  #30  
Math Team Joined: Oct 2011 From: Ottawa Ontario, Canada Posts: 13,969 Thanks: 992  Quote:
Code: A B C . . . D . E . has 3 on top and 2 on the side.. BUT Professor, the top is line AC, the side is line AE. If you push up your glasses, do you not see that point A is used twice? Methinks you should audition for the next episode of "one flew over the cuckoo's nest". Last edited by skipjack; July 21st, 2018 at 06:47 AM.  

Tags 
mathhere, problems 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
can anyone help me with this math problems?  claudia_lovez_u  Elementary Math  1  May 14th, 2012 08:24 PM 
3 Math Problems!!!  jhunt47  Algebra  10  November 17th, 2009 12:22 AM 
C++ Two Math Problems!  Climaxx  Computer Science  2  May 23rd, 2009 10:46 AM 
Some math problems  doomguardian  Algebra  2  October 17th, 2007 02:56 PM 
Please help me with these Math Problems!!!  mathhelp  Algebra  12  May 24th, 2007 05:57 AM 