Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

1 = 0

Name: Anonymous 2007-01-26 15:14

Proof:
1 = 1 + (-1 + 1) + (-1 + 1) + (-1 + 1) + ....
  = (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + ......
  = 0

kekekeke

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 11:35

>>40
actually he could be a troll, but lolz if anyone agrees with >>1 they are retard

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 15:49

The series fails the nth term test...plain and simple.

This series was actually used once by a mathematician (his name eludes me right now..) to prove the existence of God.  He claimed he had created something out of nothing.

Interesting concept anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 16:01

>>37
1=a+a+a+...+1=0+1

no, >>18 does not make sense. What the fuck is that 1 in the end of the infinite a's supposed to mean?

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 17:55 (sage)

>>43
A certain constant (1), added to an infinite sum?

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 19:40

>>43
>>(1+-1)=a
>>(-1+1)=b

These are some basic variable identities. The OP set them up, and 18 continued to use them.

>>a=b=1-1=0
>>a+a+a+...=0+0+0+...=b+b+b+...=0

Just to make sure you're following, he's now showing you how any number of each variable always equals zero, because all of the parts equal zero. It's also setting up one of the most important pieces, which is that a and b are equal.

>>"1 = 1 + (-1 + 1) + (-1 + 1) + (-1 + 1) + ....
>>  = (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + (1 + -1) + ......
>>  = 0"

This is what the OP put, which is then proven wrong in the next bit by substituting in the variables.

>>1=1+b+b+b+...=1+0
>>1=a+a+a+...+1=0+1
>>1=1

This is the final part, which proves the OP wrong.
An arbitrarily long series of A and B both equal zero and are equal to each other. Therefore an arbitrarily long series of A preceded by a 1 equals one. Because a series of A is also equal to a series of B, it is NOT true that a series of A plus 1 is equal to a series of B.

What IS true is that a series of A plus 1 is equal to a series of B plus 1, which is represented by placing the missing 1 at the end of the series.

This then completes the 1=1 identity.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 19:43

>>45
You can't put anything at the end of a .... >>18 fails for that reason alone.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 19:54

>>46
Who said anything about it necessarily being an infinite series?

The OP's attempt and 18 both work for any arbitrarily large, finite number of As and Bs. It doesn't even have to be a large number; as long as there's one variable instance, the proof still works.

Nice try on that technicality.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 21:26

>>47
The series is infinite. The ... and the end says it's infinite.

The **ONLY** way that the OP fake proof can end up with 1 = 0 is when the series is infinite. If it is not infinite, then you can put the 1 and the end of it and you end up with 1 = 1. Get it? If it is infinite, you CANNOT put the 1 at the end; that is just how infinite sums work.

Basically, what the fake proof says is that you cannot use the associative property of addition on infinite sums.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 22:10 (sage)

>>48
If it is infinite, you CANNOT put the 1 at the end; that is just how infinite sums work.
SPOILER: You can operate on an infinite series.
There is a difference between 'putting it at the end' (impossible since there is no end), and simply adding an expression to the sequence as a whole. The addition doesn't try to append to the sequence, it operates on it.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 22:44

>>49
You can not add anything to this infinite series in any sense, because it does not converge.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-02 22:56 (sage)

>>50
(-1+1)+(-1+1)+... trivially converges to 0.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 0:51

>>51
Prove it

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 1:21

>>52
-1+1=0
0+0=0

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 3:44

This infinite some does not converge in the sense that the limit of the partial sums does not exist. Now go away.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 4:21

>>53
Prove addition over the real numbers works, then come talk to me, kthnx

>>54
Sumone fails spelling. c wut i did ther?

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 10:04

This was some masterful trolling

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 10:46

no shit

Name: 1 2007-02-03 13:27

>>56
Why thank you. I also made the Irrational numbers cannot exist thread.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 13:32

Wikipedia says it is non-convergent so it must be true. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandi%27s_series)

In modern mathematics, the sum of an infinite series is defined to be equal to the limit of the sequence of its "partial sums", if it exists. The sequence of partial sums of Grandi's series is (1, 0, 1, 0, …) - it clearly does not "approach" any number ( although it does have two accumulation points - 0 and 1 ). Therefore, Grandi's series is non-convergent, or oscillating.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 19:00 (sage)

>>59
That's a different series. Note the brackets.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 19:49

>>60
It doesn't matter if there are brackets or not because of the properties of addition.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 19:52

>>61
The whole point of this topic is that you can't apply the associative property to infinite series.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-03 20:19

>>62
Unless they absolutely converge.

Name: Anonymous 2007-02-04 0:37 (sage)

>>63
Proof?

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List