
pupil
( ?)
Registered: 02/10/05
Posts: 69
Loc: in prism

a novel concept!
#4544310  08/17/05 12:13 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


1 + 1 = 1


Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs

Re: a novel concept! [Re: pupil]
#4544318  08/17/05 12:15 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


How do you know? Where's the evidence?
 So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

pupil
( ?)
Registered: 02/10/05
Posts: 69
Loc: in prism

Re: a novel concept! [Re: Ravus]
#4544333  08/17/05 12:18 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


a coworker of mine suggested this to me. It makes sense in a certain way,
one plus one equals... one!
think about it.


PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....
Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months

Re: a novel concept! [Re: pupil]
#4544344  08/17/05 12:20 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


 I'll be your midnight French Fry....
"The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...."
>^;;^<

Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs

Re: a novel concept! [Re: pupil]
#4544394  08/17/05 12:33 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Quote:
pupil said: a coworker of mine suggested this to me. It makes sense in a certain way,
one plus one equals... one!
think about it.
It'd make sense if each of those ones was a wolf fighting for its territory.
 So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

pupil
( ?)
Registered: 02/10/05
Posts: 69
Loc: in prism

Re: a novel concept! [Re: Ravus]
#4544434  08/17/05 12:43 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Quote:
Ravus said: It'd make sense if each of those ones was a wolf fighting for its territory.
...assuming that one of those wolves die? right?
well, to put this into a clearer context:
i was having a conversation about mathematics with a coworker of mine who has degrees in some math related field (i can't remember which). he suggested to me that the principles of mathematics are not as definite and reliable as we all assume them to be. he gave me the " 1 + 1 = 1 " as an example and immediately i caught on to what he was arguing.
when you combine two things, the result is a single object! it makes logical sense!


Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs

Re: a novel concept! [Re: pupil]
#4544508  08/17/05 01:00 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


If you combine two single objects, the result is one group which is represented by a number of how many objects are in that group. The numbers don't represent the groups though, they represent the amount of objects in that group, so it wouldn't really make sense.
It'd be like putting an apple and an orange together and then saying they're one fruit.
 So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

PhanTomCat
Teh Cat....
Registered: 09/07/04
Posts: 5,908
Loc: My Youniverse....
Last seen: 8 years, 7 months

Re: a novel concept! [Re: Ravus]
#4544534  08/17/05 01:04 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Think more fluidly~....
Add one drop of water to another....
 I'll be your midnight French Fry....
"The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...."
>^;;^<

gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter

Re: a novel concept! [Re: PhanTomCat]
#4544585  08/17/05 01:15 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Yes Ravus, think more fluidly like adding chaos to order to get one forum.
 Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs


What's the difference? Order is chaos, after all, and time is entropy.
 So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.

pupil
( ?)
Registered: 02/10/05
Posts: 69
Loc: in prism

Re: a novel concept! [Re: Ravus]
#4544607  08/17/05 01:19 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Quote:
Ravus said: If you combine two single objects, the result is one group which is represented by a number of how many objects are in that group. The numbers don't represent the groups though, they represent the amount of objects in that group, so it wouldn't really make sense.
It'd be like putting an apple and an orange together and then saying they're one fruit.
true, yes, very true.
i guess the heart of the issue is what you take 'addition' to be. in the practical world it is very useful to think of 'addition' as the grouping of objects as you emphasized. but suppose you took it to mean the combining of objects into one mass; how would that fit in with the more sophisticated concepts (like multiplication, exponents ect.), being that addition and subraction are among the most rudimentary concepts in math?


gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter

Re: a novel concept! [Re: Ravus]
#4544620  08/17/05 01:21 AM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


Bingo. Now you can relate to the math being proposed!
 Ahuwale ka nane huna.

tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months


1+1=1 for small values of 1 as well.
 "I am eternally free"

SerioOria
?!one#!>?
Registered: 07/23/05
Posts: 566
Loc: upstate, SC
Last seen: 12 years, 26 days

Re: a novel concept! [Re: pupil]
#4546598  08/17/05 02:20 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) 


But the same does not work for subtraction
If you take a drop of water away from a drop of water, there is no water, or you have it, whatever
Or perhaps it is a large drop of water and one smaller is taken away, ther is still one drop of water, just less
I think its all about perception and how you plan to use such things, whether its theoretical or applicable deters what conclusion you come to
Mathematically we can come to different conclusions only if we want a different conclusion, philosophically this view described in the thread makes more sense, but logically and applicably it works out best in the modern view of 1+1=2 because then we can reach vastly different conclusions for different directions, mainly based on ones opinion or wanted conclusion, mainly focusing on the world that we perceive as reality.
If you are looking for an applicable answer conventional methods only work for the physical world that we view with our (main) senses. The extrasensory is so vastly Different(if it exists) from conventional sensory that we can not comprehend it with conventional knowledge.
On another note, can multiplication actually exist in any other form than numbers. Can you take a drop of water (to stay with our comparison) and multiply it by another drop of water to get a much larger 'puddle' if you will. Say you take one atom and multiply it by 2 atoms, do you get 2 atoms or do you get 3 atoms or do you get 1 atom again. By definition, multiplication is
Quote:
# Mathematics.
1. The operation that, for positive integers, consists of adding a number (the multiplicand) to itself a certain number of times. The operation is extended to other real numbers according to the rules governing the multiplication properties of positive integers. 2. Any of certain analogous operations involving expressions other than real numbers.
If then multiplication is merely adding a number to itself a certain number of times, why do we come up with a larger group or many separate groups... again its all in perception.
But again, we must take into account that this only applies to the existent, the positive numbers. Any time you multiply a negative number (in conventional mathematics) by a positive number you end up with a negative number, even if it is 100000000000 x ?1 you come to the conclusion of ?100000000000. This makes no sense, when one multiplies 100 by 100 you end up with 1000, why then should simply adding the nonexistent (I don?t know if this is the best description, perhaps I will just say the opposite) to the equation give one such a vastly different conclusion.
You must also look at the multiplication of the nonexistent (zero) and why it always gives one the answer of zero. By definition, multiplication is adding a number to itself a certain number of times, if I add 100 to itself 0 times, this gives me zero, but why does it not give me 100, what I started with, and why then does multiplication by one only give us the number we began with rather than that number plus itself one time. Say you have 100 and multiply it by one, we have the one hundred on this hand already, and since we multiplied (or added to it) itself one time, why do we come to the conclusion of 100 rather than 200.
Im sorry if this is seems like rambling, im just putting out thoughts and theories im taking off the top of my head. Its more of a questioning conventional mathematics rather than trying to prove it completely wrong.
I now plan to confuse the hell out of my math teacher
What you guys think about this?
 Live every day like it is your first
or
Live every day like it is your last
My ArT!!

