Prove that 1+1=2 without using any math

[jagged spindle]

You have it all wrong, you get 1 drop of water, and then you add 1 drop of water on top of that, and you end up with 1 drop of water.
Therefore 1+1=1

[indigo vapor]

give me 1＋1＋1＋1＋1＋1...＋1＋1 drops of gold please

[jagged spindle]

I don't think that bug works with gold, gold was sold in nuggets/pips

[indigo vapor]

does it work with petrol

[jagged spindle]

If it's a liquid I think yea

An object that combines into a unit when "poured" on top of an existing bit

And that's like "liquid" enough so we don't tell the difference

Sand is not liquid enough

[indigo vapor]

fill my tank up with drops of petrol

[jagged spindle]

So we can tell where it separates

[jagged spindle]

hahahaha

I just imagined you going to a petrol station

1 dwrop of petrol please

[indigo vapor]

owo

[copper thistle]

Goat is here.

[hidden harness]

Can’t divide by 0

[odd lava]

1 represents a unit of something, a single entity, a whole. Its a distinct individual, separate from others. When we add another 1, we re introducing another individual or unit into the system. This means you now have two distinct things, each individually whole

[cedar lantern]

By that rational, irrationals are not numbers. Because we cannot display them in any form as countable whole elemental units.

Therefore most of the rational used by people here to include 2 as a result of two elements together, precludes the notion of irrationals as numbers or things with quantity/measurement.

https://discord.com/channels/624314920158232616/1350078306099269662

[coral wadi]

No.

[main granite]

Let this thread die it's a thread which literally leads to nowhere

[tough knoll]

Math is a model, and is not a direct observation of the physical world - thus things within it (addition) cannot be proven by things outside of it lol

Mathematics isn’t earth science or biology or anything that directly notes external reality

You can prove an observation seen through the lens of a biologist through other fields of study, because they are all observing a real and physical world

Math is no different from sentential logic, crossword puzzles, etc…This is like saying “Describe how you’d complete a sodoku puzzle without playing sodoku.”

[copper thistle]

HOW LONG HAS THIS THREAD BEEN GOING FOR BAHAHA

[devout needle]

one plus one is equal to 2. boom!! no math

[cedar lantern]

That was all math, except the boom and the false conclusion at the end.

[devout needle]

damm

[compact shadow]

ts got the most reactions ever 😭

[jagged mural]

Personally, I like using different notation
In my notation, we have that
1 + 1 = 3

||Always use protection||

[lost crescent]

that's i believe 200 something page from that book only to show 1+1=2

[lone valve]

principa mathematica

[lost crescent]

yep thats the book

they just gave up finishing formalizing everything

it was too much of a work

[coral wadi]

Not actually true.

[hot wind]

1 triangle + 1 triangle = 4 triangles synegetically and when that occurs, 3 angles + 3 angles = 12 angles. Simple

[compact shadow]

1+1=1+1

I can use logic to prove that 1+1=2 without using any math. Let's use a simple example to illustrate this. If we have one apple and add another apple, we will end up with two apples. This is a very simple and straightforward way to show that 1+1=2 without using any mathematical equations or formulas.

[coral wadi]

That's not logic or a proof. That's just an example.

[compact shadow]

Let's look at it from a different perspective then.

Let's say we have a container with no apples. If we add 1 apple, we now have 1 apple in the container. If we add another apple, the total number of apples in the container becomes 2. If we use the letter 'a' to represent the number of apples in the container, we can express it as an equation:
a + 1 = 2
Since a = 0, we can substitute this value into the equation:
0 + 1 = 2
Simplifying both sides of the equation, we get:

[coral wadi]

1 = 2.

That wouldn't have gone anywhere even if you hadn't messed it up.

[compact shadow]

You're right, my mistake! Let's try another approach.
Assume that 1+1 is equal to any number (let's call it p). So, we have:
1+1=p
Now, if we add the same quantity (1) to both sides of the equation, we get:
2+1=p+1
This simplifies to:
3=p+1
Now, if we look at the original equation:
1+1=p
We can see that p is 2, as we have just shown:
P

[coral wadi]

Prove 2 + 1 = 3.

And also that 3 - 1 = 2.

And also none of this is "without using math".

[dark ginkgo]

Numbers are a mathematical notion so if you say « one apple » then you are doing math

[dark ginkgo]

Chat gpt ah response

[compact shadow]

Then how do u explain math without the basics of math

[compact shadow]

Cuz it is I used Albert Einstein on character ai lol

Chat got

And replied to him with Albert Einstein bot

[compact shadow]

Wouldn't that mean that a apple is math, cuz a apple is one apple

[dark ginkgo]

« One » is math

[compact shadow]

If you have apples and then take away all apples you have no apples

If you take away all apples but then take back an apple then you have an apple

[coral wadi]

You can't, that's the joke.

[compact shadow]

And if you take away all apples but then take away a group of apples that is smaller than the original amount you have you have a smaller group of apples that is more apples than a apple

[compact shadow]

Oh yeah it is

[fair burrow]

please do not post llm slop. if we wanted llms we would have a bot for it.

[compact shadow]

I hereby promise to not interfere with llm produced messages an post them in the server. I have made a mistake by sending AI generated text produced by llms here when it wasn't allowed. I will from now on make sure to not repeat this mistake

[hot wind]

Triangle = finite area defined by 3 angles

3 angles + 3 angles = 12angles synergetically

This is math, and thread title is oxymoronic cause it begins with math and says dont use math.

/ \ + / \ = \Y/ aka birds-eye-view of tetrahedron with 12 surface angles
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Silicate-tetrahedron-plan-view-2D.png

[coral wadi]

...you just said 3 + 3 = 12.

[hot wind]

Yes I realize that violates the topic of thread, as does the topic of thread violate itself using math in the topic.

Beyond that, my statement is correct as I presented. Please share if believe my resultant is incorrect when using a geometrically synergetic methodology. Here is link to it. Bucky Fuller book Synergetics 1 of 2
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s01/figs/f0801.html

[zealous bloom]

(a-b)=0. Dividing by 0 IS ILLEGAL, and you shall be BEHEADED!

[hidden harness]

This is exactly like irrationality of pi

[devout needle]

the number of bundesligas harry kane has + the number of people who actually like stroll (its actually stroll himself) = the number of fingers up my a..

[compact shadow]

1+1=2 because 1=1 and 2=2=((2-1)+(2-1)) and 1=(2-1) so (2-1)+(2-1)=2 since there are two toos

[hidden harness]

Why is 1=2-1?

If I can assume that I can just add one to both sides and get 1+1=2

[zealous bloom]

What is considered "no math?" The complete absence of logic? No operations? Will any operations or changes be considered math?

[coral wadi]

Sorry, asking those questions is math.

[zealous bloom]

fuck. How is your alter ego, Tech Illiterate, doing?

[lone valve]

this is meth

[jagged mural]

Nyaaaaa~ :3 :3

[little cobalt]

W-w-why d-d-did u s-s-say thatttt~~~ >:33

[jagged mural]

Meow

[little cobalt]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/940312476749275156/1305617320277966918/image_2024-10-21_201130268.gif

[devout needle]

i would turn on the washing machine

[high burrow]

👁️ + 👁️ = 👀

[jagged mural]

Death and destruction

[copper thistle]

1+1=x
1=1-x
(1²)=(1-x)²
1=1²-2x+x²
0-2x+x²
4-0=4
2+/-√4/2=2+2/2=2 🙂

I just saw it now (without using any math)

[echo kelp]

1+1=2
Let 1=x
x+x=2
2x=2
x=2/2
x=1

2x=2
2(1)=2
1+1=2

[little cobalt]

1+1=x
**-**1=1-x or 1=x-1

https://tenor.com/view/wizard-rock-throwing-gif-3095471689337470556

[iron nimbus]

This... is still going??

[copper thistle]

1=1-x 😠

[copper thistle]

U used 2 to get 2. Incorrect proof.

[copper thistle]

How can you say x+x=2x? Fakesolve.

[devout needle]

8008 + 8008 = 80085

[copper thistle]

i used square root of 4 bro

[lone valve]

been answered so many times but someone new has to answer it themselves

[compact shadow]

Reminder

[bitter minnow]

you can prove this with two sticks?

[copper thistle]

Give a try, you will fail.

[bitter minnow]

it is prove it without maths

you gonna use something to illustrate why it is

which is rock or stick

[coral wadi]

No you can't.

[dark ginkgo]

« Two » is a mathematical notion

[bitter minnow]

two by meaning existed before the meaning of mathematics existed

[coral wadi]

No.

That's like saying words existed before language existed.

[bitter minnow]

numbers existed conceptually before mathematics as we know it existed

this is a true statement

[ember saffron]

Take a piece of playdoh. Break up the dough into two tubes. Then, Take one tube, curve it, and pinch the end onto the corner of the other tube. Behold, 1 + 1 = 2

[coral wadi]

If so, "as we know it" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

You'd basically have to be saying that people did a thing that we recognize as math before Giuseppe Peano was born.

[raw ridge]

"BILLY HAS ONE APPLE AND THEN HE TAKES ANOTHER. HOW MANY FUCKING APPLES DOES BILLY HAVE???" ahh kindergarten teacher moment

[long glade]

if billy has 10 apples calculate the volume of the 5th dimension using dish soap

in mm^2

[hot niche]

2 is defined as 1 and 1.

[iron viper]

i think is 2

[jagged mural]

{φ , {φ}}

[untold fern]

You can use FOL

Logic

Basically encode successor function as succ(x, y)

[compact shadow]

1+1=2 because
TUNG+TUNG+TUNG+TUNG+TUNG+TUNG+TUNG=SAHURE

[iron viper]

i think is 2

[iron viper]

leave

[echo kelp]

1+1=2
ts+pmo=me
pmo=me-ts
hence probed

[iron viper]

lemme guess,,,,,,,,,,,, 2?

[compact shadow]

mehoy mehoy mehoy menoy plays

[pseudo raptor]

It varies across multiple equations

Like in computer science how 1+1 = 0 carry the 1 in binary

Since there are only 2 digits

[coral wadi]

That's the same number, though. A base system is just a method of shortening the expression of a number as a sum of multiples of the base to various powers.

1 * 2^1 + 0 * 2^0 = 2 * 10^0.

Or, in base 2, 1 * 10^1 + 0 * 10^0 = 10 * 1010^0

[pseudo raptor]

Yeah, you made a good point honestly

[pseudo raptor]

That’s kind of incorrect however, you tried to combine decimal-looking components (e.g. 10^1) with binary digits

[coral wadi]

...what?

No, 10 is in binary.

[pseudo raptor]

Oh wait

[coral wadi]

The second line is literally completely identical to the first, except in the first values are expressed in decimal, and in the second values are expressed in binary.

[pseudo raptor]

I got kind of confused about how you explained it

Really sorry

Yeah you are correct

[coral wadi]

'Salright.

Of course, in both cases the equation is true independently of how you interpret the base system.

With the caveat that you interpret "1" as 1 and "0" as 0.

Such that a^1 = a and a^0 = 1.

[wispy shale]

I can prove it:
If you get a paper and paint the half of it white (for example), it is resembling 1. Now if you paint the other part black (for example), it also resebles 1. If we count the colours, we get there are 2 colours. Yay, you proved 1 + 1 = 2 without math. You also solved racism.

[devout needle]

Woof woof

[lone valve]

not a proof dough

[midnight tendon]

bro what

[jagged mural]

That isn’t a proof

You can’t “prove” this really - it’s more of a definition

In some alternate group universe I could have an abelian group with the identity as 0 and the other element as 1

Then I could say that 1 + 1 = 0

If you name the operation in the abelian group as +

It’s a matter of definitions

[lone valve]

you can prove it, just define "+" and "=" and "1" and "2"
or use peano arithmetic

[wispy shale]

i got cooked

why is this even a thing?

1 + 1 = 2, just that

[coral wadi]

Peano arithmetic is math.

[devout needle]

🐕+ 🐕= woof woof

[lone valve]

axioms*
anyway

[atomic crest]

Isn't this just like if we have some quantity we define as one, and take another one of it, their total we now define as 2? Or am I just too dumb for this

[coral wadi]

...what?

[midnight tendon]

this is not a possible question

numbers only exist because the idea of math that humans create

[wispy shale]

Why dont you guys read Principia Matematica, which contans the proof that 1 + 1 = 2. It is only 362 pages.

[coral wadi]

Actually, that's a misconception. The proof doesn't take that long, what takes that long is establishing their logical system, and that it does actually encode Peano arithmetic. Then the proof of the statement is just the proof in PA, which is pretty trivial.

[wispy shale]

ok

[coral wadi]

1. forall a(a + 0 = a)
2. forall a forall b(a + S(b) = S(a + b))```These are the axioms of addition in PA. Then `1 = S(0)` and `2 = S(1)`.

[copper thistle]

. + . = _

[little cobalt]

He likely thought you did a typo.

[jagged mural]

Is stabbing people ethical

[fading vault]

proof: I made it up for laughs

[cerulean surge]

• Grab a bunch of pennies (or any jar of coins if they’re all the same coin)
• Place one on left side of scale
• Place another on left side
• Place two on right side
• They’re balanced 🤯

[jagged mural]

What if the scale is broken

[cerulean surge]

Compare heights (before you say that requires counting)

• Stack one penny
• Stack another penny on top of it
• Stack two pennies somewhere else
• Lie a ruler on top of both stacks
• Place a marble on ruler
• If the marble doesn’t move, it’s equal

[jagged mural]

What if the ruler isn’t long enough

What if the table isn’t straight

[cerulean surge]

Ugh

• Find a FLAT table to work on (use a marble to test the flatness, if the marble rolls it isn’t flat)
• Stack one penny
• Stack another penny on top of it
• Stack two pennies somewhere else (make sure this stack is near the first stack)
• Lie a ruler on top of both stacks (If the ruler can’t be placed on both stacks, move stacks closer)
• Place a marble on ruler
• If the marble doesn’t move, it’s equal

[jagged mural]

What if the ruler isn’t straight
What if the wind pushes the marble

[cerulean surge]

How about you buy good rulers and stay indoors

[jagged mural]

What if I’m broke

[cerulean surge]

Then worry about getting money before trying to do math

[jagged mural]

What if I have money but don’t want to buy a ruler

[coral wadi]

Then you don't have pennies or marbles, either.

[coral wadi]

But how much money should you get before trying to do math?

[jagged mural]

Real

[cerulean surge]

More than what you have

[coral wadi]

How much money do I have? 🤔

[jagged mural]

$2

[coral wadi]

But how much is that??? 😩

[cerulean surge]

1 + 1 dollars

[jagged mural]

Yo Techie, do you study math in your free time?

[dark ginkgo]

Why did you ask in this channel 😭

[jagged mural]

Idk

This channel is full of cranks anyways

[coral wadi]

Sometimes, depending on what you mean by "study".

[jagged mural]

Basically do you practice and learn new math in your free time

[coral wadi]

I used to, I'm just now at a level where I don't really know what to study next or where to find properly motivated introductory material.

[jagged mural]

Oh lmao, what have you studied so far?

[coral wadi]

I mean, most of my self-study was filling in the gaps of my formal education, so; set theory, Peano arithmetic, trigonometry, and calculus, though to a sufficient degree of formality that I think it technically qualifies as analysis?

[jagged mural]

Ah - I’m using Rudin for analysis rn lol

[coral wadi]

I mean, I don't really know where the line between calculus and analysis is.

[jagged mural]

It’s well, have you done proofs in Calculus?

For like, everything?

[coral wadi]

I mean, I've attempted proofs that the limit of a sum, product, and quotient is the sum, product, and quotient of the limits, though I'm only fully confident in my success at the first of those three.

[jagged mural]

Oh lmao

I don’t think that counts tbf, analysis is a LOT more than that

[coral wadi]

And I'm, like, aware of the epsilon-delta definition of a limit, and the Darboux integral, and stuff like that.

It kind of feels like something like linear algebra might be the natural next step of my study, or something similarly abstract, but it's really hard to find motivation for that kind of stuff. Like, you can find a definition of a vector space, but not an explanation of why you would choose to define this structure in particular, y'know?

I had the same problem in trig and only recently overcame it.

[fair burrow]

I know this post is pretty old, but I'd like to respond anyway. I'll admit I understand your frustration with linear algebra and I will try to motivate it. I think modules (which are the natural "generalization" of vector spaces to arbitrary rings) are incredibly natural, just by virtue of thinking about commutative rings as Z-modules, so I will skip motivating them here, but essentially many objects can be regarded as modules in very natural ways (often as free modules or sometimes projective modules. The most difficulty feature of the vector space axioms to motivate is that we're looking at modules over a field. There are two distinct ways to motivate why this is the case, and I will present both. First, many operations which are key to getting "nice" results (like the exchange lemma) intuitively depend on the underlying ring being a field, i.e. commutativity and inverses. However, by far the most important thing is that vector spaces readily show up in number theory. When one looks at number fields, which are finite degree extensions of Q, one can effectively views these from the perspective of linear algebra as vector spaces over Q (the base field is Q) whose dimension corresponds to the degree of the extension (this is precisely how the degree is defined). As a result, considering general properties of vector spaces allows us to guarantee the existence of a basis of some arbitrary number field so that the extension degree is well-defined, and also apply general theorems of linear algebra in this context.

One can also justify the study of vector spaces from the perspective of physics, but most of the finite-dimensional stuff is actually just useless (usually one considers Hilbert spaces).

[copper thistle]

These folks need to get a life

[brave raptor]

i know commutative rings are technically Z-modules but that's kinda weird to say

[fair burrow]

it's one of the principle tools for looking at abelian groups, actually, but its a bit mistaken to regard modules as generalizations of abelian groups

[brave raptor]

idk enough about modules and rings but it seems weird cause rings have multiplication and modules usually don't

[dark ginkgo]

It’s not weird, the fact that a ring is a Z module can be useful, the important part is that a ring is an abelian group (for addition), like for example if you have an integral domain with prime characteristic p it can be endowed with an Z/pZ vector space structure because it is a Z module

[brave raptor]

yeah

but it has more structure other than Z-module, so for me it feels kinda weird to ignore that

it's true though

[dark ginkgo]

that is why math is pretty cool , you don’t need all the information on an algebraic structure to arrive at some interesting conclusions

[brave raptor]

ok that makes sense

thanks

[fair burrow]

I mean there are other reasons, like the category of R-modules being a very natural place to do homological algebra in

[fair burrow]

most people i think will say that we look at modules as a natural class of objects to do representation theory with and this is probably the single biggest reason, in addition to serving as essentially the most natural "first place" for homological algebra before moving to arbitrary abelian categories

i want to underscore the holistic nature of justifying mathematical concepts, because most mathematics falls into either the categories of mathematics for no reason or mathematics to do other mathematics and the vast majority of actual mathematics is the latter--like the only reason representations in the context of modules is useful is because modules are nice objects to work with, i could just as easily do representation theory with sets but this is not very useful on its own, e.g. the proof of Cayley's theorem usually just consists of forgetting all the interesting group structure

[dark ginkgo]

Yes ofc, there are a lot of reasons that is why modules are important

[wispy shale]

but guys, 1 + 1 equals 10

[hidden harness]

🤖

[surreal kernel]

0 is the base
1 is the successor of 0: S(0)
2 is the succesor of 1: S(S(0))
any number a a+0=a
any a and b a+S(b)=S(a+b)
1+2 written as S(0)+S(0)

a+S(b)=S(a+b) so S(0)+S(0)=S(S(0)+0) and
S(S(0)+0)=S(S(0)) therefore 1+1=2

[jagged mural]

Lmao

[undone seal]

If you don't want to accept 2 as 1+1 then don't, who cares
:shrug:

The discussion between Ravi and Techie was more useful than this 1+1=2 shit

[undone seal]

Yo, you're saying that for a while, how much progress you have made

[jagged mural]

I seriously started on the 22nd of July I think

[jagged mural]

I’ve finished the remaining half of the 3rd chapter, the entire 4th chapter and over half the 5th chapter by now

Just solved Q20

[undone seal]

You have gone through 5 chapters of the book in 10 days?

💀

[jagged mural]

2 💀

[undone seal]

Hah

What did you just say

[undone seal]

.

[jagged mural]

Yeah?

I was doing Rudin before but I wasn’t serious about it

[undone seal]

Oh

How terse the book is

[jagged mural]

???

It’s tough

[undone seal]

Did you have extensive exposure to proofs before Rudin

[jagged mural]

Not too much

[undone seal]

Did you solve all problems of the two chapter

Is it important to solve all the problems

[jagged mural]

Not all

[jagged mural]

Most are important

[jagged mural]

I’ve skipped like 3 problems so far

[undone seal]

What do you plan to study after baby Rudin, papa Rudin?

[jagged mural]

Nah, abstract algebra

[undone seal]

Did you manage to find a favourable book for it

[jagged mural]

Marco Hien

[undone seal]

Ok

[tacit lynx]

monkey have 1 banana, monkey get another banana, monkey have 2 banana

[brazen nest]

its more like

monkey have banana, monkey get another banana , monkey think , monkey group the bana togerther and call them 2 banana

[undone seal]

What if monkey calles them 3 banana, there's no guarantee

[jagged mural]

Then we send monkey to the thought police and pretend they never existed by erasing all traces of them

Then we beat monkey until he believes with his full self that grouping one banana and another banana will get it 2 bananas

[dark ginkgo]

That is bananas

[jagged mural]

But it will work

[undone seal]

Then the monkey calls his gang, 20 sigma monkeys beat up the thought police and forcefully keep feeding them banana pizza until they believe that if they have a banana and they get another banana they have 3 banana

[brazen nest]

But then the thought military intervenes and beats the monkeys until they believe in 2 bananas again

[undone seal]

Then the mighty moneky general intervenes again, with his army 100 sigma monkeys, he begins to laugh like Kira. Unable to flee, the thought military announces that anybody who doesn't admit that one banana and one banana are three banana has to eat banana pizza for the rest of his life

[coral wadi]

But then the Great Ape Alliance invades for the bananas and rips the tail off anyone who says one banana and another banana make three bananas.

[brazen nest]

But then a monkey in the great ape alliance thinks, it thinks that 3 is more than 2 and it starts a revolution in the great apes alliance , which ends up collapsing it . Then any ape that refuses to accept that one banana and another banana makes three bananas is put into electric chairs.

[coral wadi]

There aren't any monkeys in the Great Ape Alliance.

[brazen nest]

Well there is now

[coral wadi]

That's what makes it great. And ape.

[jagged mural]

Before the revolution could even happen, the thought police found out because their comrades ratted them out :p

Everyone got converted :p

[lone valve]

is this about basic addition or monkeys

[jagged mural]

Both

[copper thistle]

This is about monkeys figuring out basic addition.

[lone valve]

rise of the planet of apes

[chrome totem]

:moneybag: @tribal basin has 0 and 14

:white_check_mark: Took 14 Gau from @tribal basin

:white_check_mark: Gave 14 Gau to @wild willow

[jagged mural]

Lmfaooo

[devout needle]

Bubu thinks ts ain't tuff 💔🥀

[jagged mural]

What

[boreal mesa]

@wild willow ????

Show

[jagged mural]

Miguel don’t you know what happened

Apex grave robbed people

(Because I may or may not have suggested it)

So we had to fix things

So I gave Viata that user

[boreal mesa]

This does not explain anything

[jagged mural]

Why

[boreal mesa]

Why did Viata take Absta's balance

[jagged mural]

Who’s absta

[boreal mesa]

Unknown user

[jagged mural]

I told her to for her to get on top again

[boreal mesa]

And she just took the money from someone? Wtf

That's not her Gau

[jagged mural]

Apex did the same

Smh

[boreal mesa]

Who with

[jagged mural]

Apex must have stole like 60 gau

[jagged mural]

Don’t remember

I think I have pictures

I don’t have pictures

[boreal mesa]

They're def losing their Gau perms

[jagged mural]

Lol

[tacit lynx]

an analogy about monkeys and now we've got monkey alliances or whatever 😭

[coral wadi]

Ape alliances.

And just the one.

[tacit lynx]

it starts as one but soon there will be a civil war within the alliance and the apes will either become sithapes or jedapes

[coral wadi]

But with their big ape brains they still all know 1 + 1 = 2.

[tacit lynx]

yes

[jagged mural]

Yes

[prime spire]

This has soon been going on for 1+1 years now

[jagged mural]

Maybe

[boreal mesa]

We should bring the OP back to celebrate

[jagged mural]

Real, who is the OP

I think the OP left

[echo kelp]

Wait we should use axioms

[limpid vessel]

1+1=2 because we said so. That's how 1, +, and 2 are defined

[boreal mesa]

Yee

[coral wadi]

But that would be math.

[echo kelp]

It's statements that don't need proofs

That's why they're called axioms

[coral wadi]

...yes, I know what an axiom is.

[echo kelp]

What we can do is describe one

And just do smth idk

[deft turtle]

one shoe on my left foot, another on my right; how many do I wear in total?

[deft turtle]

💔

[jagged mural]

π

[deft turtle]

π jumpscare (be scared)

[foggy wedge]

Can anyone read this?

[copper thistle]

nope

[idle acorn]

oog has stone and says "have stone." oog pick up other stone. oog say "have a stone and other stone. I HAVE TWO STONE."

[jagged mural]

What if oog said “I HAVE THREE STONE”

[idle acorn]

[jagged mural]

oog does not know about the concept of numbers

[jagged mural]

Do you want to do some Calc I exercises

[idle acorn]

I have Algebra II to worry about. Maybe another time 😭

[jagged mural]

Oh, what grade are you in??

I’m a senior :p

[main granite]

when are we gonna lock this

[little cobalt]

never

[jagged mural]

Yes

[undone seal]

Until the guy wraps his head around the fact that if he got a banana and his gf gives him another he won't have total three bananas

Or maybe he will?

https://tenor.com/view/jujutsu-kaisen-sukuna-i-don't-care-hand-face-gif-6233163205990621395

[jagged mural]

Yes, what if his gf actually has 2 bananas

[steel summit]

woah

its still going on 💀

[jagged mural]

Yes, no one has come up with a satisfactory proof yet

[steel summit]

Fym satisfactory, there aint no satisfaction in maths without using maths 😭🙏🏼

[copper thistle]

Just hit 2 years lol

[coral wadi]

But is that 1 + 1 years???

[copper thistle]

Hence proved.

[undone seal]

Whole point of the argument

[lone valve]

plenty have, but someone else just comes in with a emperical example instead of a proof or some shit

[jagged mural]

Ok true

But this thread shall never close

[topaz ether]

bro, as long as arithmetic is considered to be a mathematical operation, i dont see any other way to prove 1+1=2

prove me wrong

[iron hatch]

Counting is repeated addition. In type theory, numbers are meta-functions which repeat addition of 1 however many times they are called. We can then order numbers by subtraction, an operator which pops an add 1 operator out of each until we have found which number is bigger (we use an if statement for that)

All that to say, in maths, counting is just addition

Oops

Addition is just counting

[lone valve]

so like the successor function?

atp its just debating semantics but ig a foundations mathematician woud know better than me

[coral wadi]

We don't need subtraction, which isn't even closed on the natural numbers, to define ordering. We can simply state that, for any natural numbers a and b, a >= b iff there exists a natural number c such that a = b + c.

a > b iff a >= b and a =/= b.

a <= b iff b >= a, and a < b iff b > a.

[iron hatch]

Pretty much but no underlying sets

Basically everything there is constructed out of atoms and their methods

[coral wadi]

I mean, you're just talking about PA.

ZF encodes PA, but they are different things.

[iron hatch]

I didn't say subtraction

What I defined is a comparison function

[coral wadi]

We can then order numbers by subtraction

[iron hatch]

Why am I arguing with a school graduate

Ok so

You have many misunderstandings

I am using type theory not set theory

[coral wadi]

You're encoding Peano arithmetic.

[iron hatch]

I'm not

[coral wadi]

The Peano axioms aren't set-theoretic.

[iron hatch]

Dude

Who mentioned sets

[coral wadi]

You did!

Several times!

[iron hatch]

And this all because you think counting isn't addition

[iron hatch]

When did I ever

[coral wadi]

Here.

[coral wadi]

Here.

[iron hatch]

.......

Do you not understand negation

Not set theory, no underlying sets

[coral wadi]

You. Are. The. Only. One. Saying. The. Word. "Set."

[iron hatch]

Nice ragebait

[coral wadi]

If true statements are ragebait, what the fuck are you doing in a math server?

[iron hatch]

Don't bother typing

I blocked you

[coral wadi]

Be smug or be wrong. Both is a bad look.

[iron hatch]

Bananas can't be owned by imaginary people.

[jagged mural]

We assume gf in this case :p

[iron hatch]

Leading to contradiction

I hate this thread because this was me

Except I was less antisocial

[jagged mural]

???

[iron hatch]

As in

When I was a young baby lad

I probably would have done something like that this guy is doing

[jagged mural]

Who, Techie??

[iron hatch]

Yeah

[jagged mural]

Uhhhh

He’s just techie vro T-T

[iron hatch]

I'm not active

On this server

I got a life

Wrote a book

[jagged mural]

I can tell, this is the first time I’m seeing you here

[jagged mural]

This really doesn’t entail you just vanishing tbf :p

Calling us lifeless is pretty much wrong :p

We have lives - well, most of us

[iron hatch]

Nah sorry

Didn't mean to imply it

I meant I am very busy

What's with the analysis phase Ravioli?

[ancient eagle]

Apple and apple is more then one apple

[steel summit]

😨

Now prove that "more than one apple" is "two apples"

[ancient eagle]

Im not allowed to use numbers

[ancient eagle]

Never overthink it, 1+1=2 because 2 is 2 times more then one, any number that adds to itself is equal to n(2)

Anything times 1 is itself

N is equal to 1,in this case

[lone valve]

bro its type theory not set theory, you can prove certain things in different foundational theories. You dont need PA to prove things in a different formal system

anyway use PA or not, 1+1=2 has been proven

here

many times

[coral wadi]

What the fuck do you think PA is, and why do you think it's set theory?

[scarlet remnant]

Reminder to be respectful Techie

[jagged mural]

Oh - I’m doing real analysis from Baby Rudin

I’ve managed to power through 5 whole chapters in the past 5 weeks

[ancient eagle]

Im in the wrong server all the s keep arguing

[jagged mural]

Are you calling us nerds because you fail to comprehend what we are arguing about?

[iron hatch]

That's amazing!

Did you do the exercises?

Do not skip any exercises they are all very important

[jagged mural]

Well, why else would I have only completed like, 5 chapters in 5 weeks

If I was skipping around I would’ve been done by now :p

[jagged mural]

Oh ik lmfao

[iron hatch]

Dude

You're insane

[jagged mural]

I’ve skipped like, maybe 3 questions I think tbf

[iron hatch]

I wasn't nearly this fast when I was reading it

And I skipped most of it

[jagged mural]

Like some were just repeating the same thing over and over again

[jagged mural]

Oh lmfaooo

[iron hatch]

I used another book tho

I read it on the side

[jagged mural]

My strategy is to do Rudin for like 3-4 hours a day usually :p

I get through like a few questions everyday at that pace

[jagged mural]

Huh

[jagged mural]

Rn it’s the weekend (long weekend as well, labor day) so I plan to speedrun

[iron hatch]

I'm an engineering majour

Do you think I should try to finish papa rudin?

[jagged mural]

Probably not

[iron hatch]

Well then I will.

[jagged mural]

You won’t need hardcore analysis for an engineering degree

[iron hatch]

How about that

Engineering is so much easier than pure maths

[jagged mural]

Dude please don’t compete with me, it’s not good for your sanity T-T

[iron hatch]

Why

[jagged mural]

I’m doing baby Rudin anyways

[jagged mural]

I’m in high school - I have tons of free time

[iron hatch]

Ah

I just noticed

[jagged mural]

Speaking of that I should work on my college essays and research paper

[iron hatch]

You're indian

Nah you win

[jagged mural]

Lmfaooooo

[iron hatch]

Mah

[jagged mural]

Real

[iron hatch]

Nah

I was like you

Don't do research any time soon

[jagged mural]

It’s an assignment in literature lol

[iron hatch]

Everything you think is a frontier issue has been done long ago

Ah

[jagged mural]

It is NOT actual research

[iron hatch]

I thought it was like

Lmfao

Also

[jagged mural]

I’m just going to yap about morality based on 1984 and Hitler and Stalin and stuff

[iron hatch]

Don't fall into the model theory rabbit hole

And algebraic geometry

And cat theory

[jagged mural]

Hm

[iron hatch]

None of them are important for you anytime soon

[jagged mural]

I’m going to be doing algebraic topology eventually

[jagged mural]

Lmfaooo I tried cat theory

[iron hatch]

Same I'll double majour

[jagged mural]

Aluffi confused me a lot, so I gave up

[iron hatch]

Everything you'll comprehend is toy examples

Still not useful

Papa rudin is super hard

I actually wont do it

I'll do Conway's

Conway's is super great

And it's by CONWAY

[undone seal]

What's the book name

If you can survive Papa Rudin you can get a master's degree in math

[mint granite]

So basically if you add one pencil to another pencil, that'll be 2 pencils

[jagged mural]

What if the monkey said it’s three pencils

[coral wadi]

If you add one pencil to another pencil, that's combining them and the result is one pencil of greater mass.

[jagged mural]

1+1 is an undefined query

[undone seal]

What if the hippotamus calls it π pencils

[weary dust]

get a job bro

[jagged mural]

Ik, what is preventing such sins?

[jagged mural]

Do you have a job that can support you

[weary dust]

no

[undone seal]

Probably us and our delusional perceptions

[prime spire]

"One plus one equals two"

There you go. No math symbols, hence no math. Case closed.

[steel summit]

Bro thinks he tuff

[earnest niche]

[jagged mural]

,w 1+1

[mystic sand]

Results provided by WolframAlpha

Click here to refine your query online
Upgrade to WolframAlpha Pro!

Requested by inverse_cupid

[steel summit]

oh shi

[copper thistle]

Why two, why not 3?

[copper thistle]

Communist propaganda.

[jagged mural]

Guys

In 1984, the government said that 2+2=5, and everyone knows that the government in 1984 is always right (if you don’t you’ll be vaporized and erased from existence)

Hence by simple maths we get
2+2=5
1+1=2.5

QED

[copper thistle]

Wrong.

[jagged mural]

You’re gonna get vaporized

[copper thistle]

Try

[compact shadow]

its not actually 1+1=totr

[stable moat]

since addition is defined within math we cannot do it since the problem itself uses math. Now this discussion can be closed

[agile carbon]

Oh man this is still going on!

[jagged mural]

Real (I can’t understand it)

[steel summit]

because youre inferior

[raw ridge]

how is ts still going

[undone seal]

Because no one hasn't come up with a real proof yet

[stable moat]

I ended it my guy with one thing

For example

Prove without using historical sources that George Washington was real.

You can't do it because the problem itself uses historical sources

With this you are asking some math question to be proven without using math.

[undone seal]

My bro this chat was ended 3500 messages ago🫥

[jagged mural]

Why end this chat

When

We could use it to relay secret messages to each other and topple the economy in this server

So here’s the plan - someone creates two alts and hooks them up with autotypers in #counting then starts distributing bucketloads of eul to everyone

@boreal mesa do you like this plan

[stable moat]

I already do that. I have them wait a few hours after each

[jagged mural]

Lmfao

[boreal mesa]

No

[jagged mural]

1+1=3

[lone valve]

Ima restart this forum post

[long glade]

it was solved with axioms which are more like reasons to logic then maths

[boreal mesa]

No this has to live on forever

[jagged mural]

Real

[uncut pulsar]

cant we just call it human understanding?

[steel summit]

Average aryan

[jagged mural]

Well, what if someone claims that 1+1=3? How would you disprove them?

[long glade]

With a gun

[jagged mural]

I like your thinking, but this would cause more people to speak up… you have to subdue an entire population, how would you do it?

[long glade]

Refer to WW2.

https://tenor.com/view/apple-cat-apple-cat-zhuangzhuang-zhuang-gif-10567909272833094461

[jagged mural]

They also failed smh, the model is 1984

[long glade]

We have bigger guns now

[uncut pulsar]

bro like how we have words and our own source of communication, numbers in maths are a value that everyone agrees on to be 1,2 or 3..

[jagged mural]

Agreement isn’t proof unfortunately

[steel summit]

average aryan

[long glade]

That's why we have nukes

Call me kim jong un cus this shit gonna blow (rightful supreme leader)

[lone valve]

the only rightful supreme leader is dictator aladeen

[long glade]

you're the first one im gonna execute

be glad, deportii

[odd light]

I just skipped the middle part from the top where everyone was fighting that including numbers is gonna always include math and other heavily mathematical discussions and... holy shit how did we get to nukes and kim jong un💀

[long glade]

its in the lore read the lore

[odd light]

yea I shouldn't have skipped the middle part

[jagged mural]

Lmfao

Proof by intimidation be like

[lone valve]

naruto be like

[winged notch]

because it does

1+1=2

!

[little cobalt]

the question was if 1+1=2, not if 1+1=2! .

[long glade]

0! = 1 cus fuck u

[coral wadi]

No, it's because there's precisely one 0-tuple that can be made out of 0 elements.

n! would be the number of n-tuples it is possible to form from the elements of an n-set.

[long glade]

shuuush

no maths allowed

[boreal mesa]

0! = 1 by definition

[undone seal]

But this is math

Define math first

[long glade]

Either it's quantitative calculation (excluding reasoning because look at quantum mechanics am I right lads) of quantity, space, structure, and change or meth spelled wrong. If it is meth, that would explain why people write it on the walls.

[jagged mural]

Actually, 1+1=0 if we are in ℤ/2ℤ

[ashen prawn]

Proof by threatening with a gun is gonna work here splendidly

[turbid ingot]

Can this technically be solved by: Each box contains 1 point, hence 2 boxes are created when 2 points are distributed among the boxes; Thus showing that 2 points create 2 boxes, and onward. Let me know what you think

[dark ginkgo]

How is this still going

[jagged mural]

Idk - but there’s slow mode for some reason now

[dark ginkgo]

You are still using math « 1 » is math, you can’t prove math without using math, it makes no sense, it’s like telling someone to write a book without using the alphabet

[jagged mural]

You should write a book without using the alphabet

[steel summit]

Who added slow mode

[little cobalt]

Sloooowww (Edit 1: Holy shit, 10 minutes)

[jagged mural]

@gleaming crag remove slowmode from here

[marsh cloak]

No

[copper thistle]

I'll prove 1=2 tomorrow.

[turbid ingot]

Ill prove we actually live in a simulation by flying into a black hole and accidently breaking the simulation because thats actually something they never designed fully tomorrow. Thus proving 1=2

[little cobalt]

1 = 1
0 x 1 = 0 x 1
0 x 1 = 0 x 2
1 = 2

[lone valve]

I'll contact the higher beings and ask them if 1+1=2 gimme a sec

[copper thistle]

I will prove it with calculus.

[lone valve]

.

[steel summit]

remove the fucking timeout

[ionic light]

remove the timeout

[ionic light]

1+1 is 3

[jagged mural]

Ravi-san does not like this slowmode
Ravi-san says to get rid of it

[lone valve]

depoii kun tells ravi san to speak in first person please

[copper thistle]

Proof by contradiction:
Suppose 1+1 isn't equal to 2 but we know 1+1=2 , so by contradiction, 1+1=2

[jagged mural]

Ravi-san does not see any problem with their current style of speech

[ashen prawn]

The lord commands thou to stop this utter madness that thou hast titled to be 'speech' at once!

[jagged mural]

Lmfaoooo

[jagged mural]

Can someone remove slowmode

[lone valve]

can someone prove riemann hypothesis rq

also it seems slowmo is gone

[jagged mural]

Yesss

W

[copper thistle]

1+1=2 is harder to prove.

[jagged mural]

1+1=0 guhhh

[jagged mural]

One must imagine it proven…

[quasi gull]

All of this conversation just to prove 1+1=2?

[jagged mural]

Well some people have actually proven it here, but most just come up with botchy ideas lol

[chrome totem]

:moneybag: You have 0 and 8

[echo kelp]

@lone valve

[lone valve]

whu

[jagged mural]

Guys 1+1=3

[ionic light]

1+1 is equal to 2 because when you count from 1 you go to another 1 which is 2

with math: (0.999=1) 0.999+0.999 is equal to 1 or 0.5*4 is equal to 2

[ionic light]

sybau

[copper thistle]

Fake.

[jagged mural]

I’m serious lol
Scroll up

[foggy wedge]

sybau

[ionic light]

nah

[ionic light]

ik

[jagged mural]

Your proof doesn’t work T-T

[ionic light]

ok

why was this forum even made ngl

[jagged mural]

It was made for funnies lol

[ionic light]

funnies

[jagged mural]

Yeah

[ionic light]

furries

[white root]

it would seem difficult to prove math without math because math is such a broad term

[dark ginkgo]

It’s not possible, this post was made as a joke probably

[white root]

fair fair. the exact opposite of this is those videos of people doing proofs that 1+1=2 via advanced maths

[dark ginkgo]

I agree purple guy

[ionic light]

why does this forum exist, there is no way to prove 1+1=2 without using math. Counting is math, operations is math. The only proof is that 1+1=2.

[white root]

what if 1+1 = 4 actually

[ionic light]

ima make my own forum guys

[dark ginkgo]

It’s a joke forum

[ionic light]

if it is a joke then ima create my own

[hardy cargo]

Try rewriting the equation as 0+1+1=2+0. Mark where you are standing as ‘0’. Move 1 step forward and then another step forward in the same direction. Turn around and move 2 steps forward. Are you back at the marker labeled ‘0’?

[jagged mural]

No, I'm Zoro and I ended up in France

[hardy cargo]

c'est magnifique!

[dark ginkgo]

Do as you wish, as long as it is within the server rules

[ionic light]

Alr bro

[gilded goblet]

My attempt at solving this:

We begin with a self-contained entity, we'll call it "A".
Nothing else exists in this world.
In this model of existence, we have "oneness" a single point of being, undivided.

Next, we imagine a similar world, but we introduce an entity named "B", B is NOT identical to A. We have now created a difference, and have moved from unity to duality.

Recap:
When there was only A, there was oneness.
When B appeared, a relationship became possible.
There can now be comparison, distance, contrast, interaction, tension, harmony.
This new relational potential is what we symbolically label as “Two.”

“Two” is not a number here it’s the condition of plurality, of difference existing alongside sameness.

We can express this as:

1. There exists a state containing a singular distinct entity.
2. A second, non-identical, entity is introduced.
3. We now have "distinction" two centres of identity.
4. Therefore, the conceptual act of adding one distinct existance into a reality alongside another, transforms the world from unity to duality.

This transformation can be represented in arithmetic by what we call 1+1=2.

I'm assuming this is a joke post though because underlying mathematics are intrinsic to arithmetic operators.

[reef hill]

Nonmathematically speaking, it is just a convention

[jagged mural]

Yeah there’s a “crank” tag lol

[gilded goblet]

What do you think about my answer?

[steel summit]

You dont prove 1=1 hence you dont prove 1+1=2 💦💦💦

[gilded goblet]

Is this "ragebait" or did you completely miss the point of what I wrote

[dark ginkgo]

It was clearly a joke

[steel summit]

Are you dumb or are you trying to seem smart

[gilded goblet]

It eludes me as to how the former is relevant.

[ionic light]

1+1=2 because it is

[lone valve]

pac said so

[ionic light]

yeah

[jagged mural]

What if you’re wrong

[little cobalt]

bro got the youtube default pfp

[ionic light]

Well I’d just ignore the other answers

[pine ridge]

because people say it is

[boreal mesa]

Proof by majority

[turbid ingot]

This is a very weak argument and would not be a direct proof of 1+1=2

[gilded goblet]

yeah, but I'm not allowed to make use of mathematics. So mathematical proof conventions are not allowed

making everyone's reason here both valid and invalid

because validity in and of itself is a mathematical concept

[crystal gyro]

1+1=2 cuz it came to me in a dream

Ramanujan style. But just 1+1

[turbid ingot]

Then you need to define what 1 is

[bright elm]

When we say "without using any math", what do we mean here? Are we talking no math AT ALL? So, no way of abstracting real life quantity to concepts of numbers and applying addition on them? Or what? I'm very confused to what "using math" even means here. Because you could make the argument that "1 quantity added on 1 quantity yields two quantities" IS counting/accumulation, which is a mathematical concept.

[dark ginkgo]

It’s a joke post, no you can’t prove math without math

[bright elm]

that's what I thought, thank you :>

[gilded goblet]

exactly

[cerulean robin]

How is this still active?

[copper thistle]

Lets hold a vote on whether 1+1=2, if x% of people agree then 1+1=2 (where x>90)

[astral crane]

CaptainLengthyBottom's bF2

1+1=?

1⃣ 2
2⃣ Something else

[odd hazel]

A counter represents one

I give you a counter twice

How many counters do you have

[copper thistle]

You used the concept of math, breaks the rule

[odd hazel]

That absolutely ridiculous full proof that 1+1=2 is about as useful as stating that 1+1=1+1

[silk tusk]

The renderer took too long to respond.

[cobalt rock]

if you have one positron blackhole, and if you buy another positron blackhole, and if you want to give one positron blackhole to each of your friends, you only require two friends, thus 1+1=2

wait

shoot i forgot to account for when n is negative

[copper thistle]

Godels incompleteness theorem

[earnest niche]

Helloistudied9hours

[copper thistle]

I studied 9 hours in 9 years.

[hollow creek]

Ain't proving none till I get my hands on some burger and fries

[cobalt rock]

this should be one of those $1,000,000 dollar problems

"we have to first start by rigorously defining the boundaries of mathmatics, which is rigorously defined as such below" 🗣️ 🔥

[white rune]

This aged like fine wine

[copper thistle]

My solution: Ban mathematics

[onyx warren]

im a total noob so dont take my answer seriously and i'm sure this argument will have been raised but isn't it just a relationship. two ones are interchangeable with one two. meow.

[wide osprey]

0.1x20=2

[gleaming prairie]

good job the apple seeds sprouted and I am interested in life again

I saw it

both apples were held long enough to ferment and equal to 3 happned

[gleaming prairie]

stinker I'm back two from three at one

[lone valve]

REVIVE

[cobalt rock]

nuh uh

[copper thistle]

I like oranges.

[earnest niche]

I like banana

[odd lava]

its impossible to prove it without math

[jagged mural]

Yes, but you can prove it with coercion and gaslighting

Or

One time I knew a kid who thought that 1+1 ≠ 2. He now works at McDonalds, minimum wage. He so deep in debt that half the US debt comes from him alone. You can believe 1+1 ≠ 2, but you know, just warning you.

(Say in Asian accent for maximum effect)

[odd lava]

im crying😭

[dark ginkgo]

Proof by inducing

[jagged mural]

Proof by advanced torture methods

[coral wadi]

Proof by induction coil.

[dark ginkgo]

Oh you mean physics ?

[jagged mural]

Shhhh

[cobalt rock]

there's a really long page proof by alfred north whitehead and bertrand russell that attempts to derive all of mathematics, and in that proof, it as a side effect, proves 1+1=2 without using "math"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principia_Mathematica

[jagged mural]

The actual proof isn’t very long lol, it’s just that it takes a long time to build the machinery needed to prove that 1+1=2

And technically, you could rebrand whatever the textbook defines as dihh

So, you’d technically be proving the statement 1+1=2 with dihh, not math

[cobalt rock]

which is good because we can't use math

[jagged mural]

Exactly

[boreal mesa]

Yeee

I've wanted to

read through that book here

This Summer

So

2 months

How many pages it is

Like 200?

,calc 200/60

[mystic sand]

Result:

3.3333333333333

[boreal mesa]

We do 5 pages a day

And by the end of the Summer we will hae proven that 1+1=2

[earnest niche]

Ni

[calm grail]

there's a term in law that some facts are so obvious and so known to the public that there's no need for any evidence

[cobalt rock]

yay :D

[vestal star]

Imagine you have one apple. Then someone gives you one more apple. Now, if you count all the apples together, you have two apples.

[jagged mural]

What if I say that I have “awooga” apples

[cobalt rock]

ya watch numberphile huh

[cobalt rock]

well you see, greg the crocodile spontaneously combusted into a semiglobulating gas chamber and actually decomposed into TREE(TREE(TREE(g64)))) tetrated to TREE(TREE(TREE(g64)))) apples and solved world hunger

[jagged mural]

Lmao

[coral wadi]

I mean, yes, destroying the world would in fact "solve" world hunger.

[cobalt rock]

mhm

i think my job is done here

[jagged mural]

Similar to how an asteroid would result in world peace

[lapis basalt]

Aristotle over here

[copper thistle]

Let us restart work on this problem in big 2026.

[jagged mural]

Hmm

[ionic light]

yes

[jagged mural]

1+1=3 guys

[undone seal]

1+1=69

[copper thistle]

69-(1+1)

[ionic light]

no its 11

[white rune]

1+1 is not equal to 2. 2=2 would be right

same symbol must be on both sides of the equality

2 and 1 are different symbols so no 1+1 is not 2

[ionic light]

https://tenor.com/view/tesla-and-einstein-luma-ai-gif-14475294631445060178

[cobalt rock]

we were doing so well 😭💀

[boreal mesa]

2026

2+0+2+6

10

10 is 2 in binary

2026 = 2

2026-2 = 2-2

2024 = 0

Hmm

[cobalt rock]

tuff

[ionic light]

Hey guys how's it going. My name is Chandler and im 31. Im a game developer who dabbles in math visualization. Ive got an open discussion right now about something ive found. Please look take a peak im dying for some feedback.

Cheers yall.

[ionic light]

2025 is supposed to be 0

that year was the worst

[boreal mesa]

That's okay, multiply both sides by 2025/2024

2025 = 0

[ionic light]

tuff

2026=1

[undone seal]

Hey guys how's it going. My name is Chandler and im 31. Im a game developer who dabbles in math visualization. Ive got an open discussion right now about something ive found. Please look take a peak im dying for some feedback.

Cheers yall.

[ionic light]

Hey guys how's it going. My name is Chandler and im 31. Im a game developer who dabbles in math visualization. Ive got an open discussion right now about something ive found. Please look take a peak im dying for some feedback.

Cheers yall.

[tawny marsh]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but its ipso facto. 2 is defined to be the successor of 1.

[coral wadi]

We're talking about 1 + 1, what is this "successor" thingy?

[ionic light]

hi

[tawny marsh]

+1 is the successor. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

so ipso facto 2 = 1+1

and it is also ipso facto that successor is +1

[coral wadi]

You're wrong.

[tawny marsh]

But +1 is the successor ipso facto

[tawny marsh]

If I am wrong, I am truly sorry.

[jagged mural]

Cool, now define the successor without math

[junior bison]

i mean, we dont need to prove 1 + 1 with math, since math is both an invention and discovery. Math as a language, 1 Tree + 1 Tree would still equal Two tree even without the math languange. Thoughts?

Another example could be-

the 5 five fingers in 1 hand and 5 finger fingers in the other hand would still be equal to ten.

Even if we dont use math language of 5+5=10

[tawny marsh]

I just said ipso facto.

We define 2 as the successor of 1

and we define the successor of a number $k$ as $k+1$

[mystic sand]

Annie Maqionde

[tawny marsh]

Additionally, proving a statement of math without math itself is equivalent to saying to prove that the colour of a certain plant is green neither by seeing nor by any analysis of light.

[cobalt rock]

succession of k is k+1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_function

[coral wadi]

"Is" is the problem. With the whole "ipso facto" thing, I took it to be "is defined as", in which case, no, the successor is defined prior to addition. If "is" means "is provably equivalent to", then yes.

[cobalt rock]

https://tenor.com/view/faahhh-fah-faaaahhhhhhhhhh-gif-5689410497065596135

[coral wadi]

No, we don't. We define the successor, and then we define addition.

And then we show that S(k) = k + 1.

It's a theorem, not an axiom.

[jagged mural]

What does that mean

[copper thistle]

Precisely.

Maybe we can use contradiction?

[ionic light]

if you have a tree and another tree how many trees do you have

[jagged mural]

67

Duh

[ionic light]

In the big 26

[cobalt rock]

https://tenor.com/view/bosnov-67-bosnov-67-67-meme-gif-16727368109953357722

ahh

[fervent gust]

if a = b, you can instantly see that a + b = exactly 2x the amount of a.

[cobalt rock]

that's math

[rancid pine]

The fundamental limitation of math is inability to prove something without an axiom. The whole problem of this question is the blurry distinction between axiom and its trivial consequences. What is the set of axioms, that can produce the algebraic system we all have in mind?

[fervent gust]

yea, but like substitute a and b for like apples or smth

[cobalt rock]

but what if the apples reproduce

before you count them

[coral wadi]

So then a + b = 0 because I ate all the apples.

[fervent gust]

ahhh fr

so, bc you ate the apples, 1+1 is now undefined

[glass musk]

1/0=2/0 i.e 1 =2

[jagged mural]

Real, but you can take the same axioms and package them under the name “The Revival of the Third Reich”

Then, you can prove that 1+1=2 with The Revival of the Third Reich, not math

[rancid pine]

Which means there is only one package named “Math” and it can’t be modified directly. It can only be logically extended

[quasi summit]

in this room ,there is me ,and you , you(1) added me(1) equals 2

simple

[jagged mural]

What if you spread propaganda such that no one realizes that it’s actually math

[jagged mural]

No, I claim that there are now π people in the room

[quasi summit]

so its pi is jsut a symbol,and if there is no math then there is no meaning of pi cuz maths too describes circles as geometry and using 3 yo logic , circle-geometry = math's part or field of it.

period!

i won,close this chat,the ans is proven

~Albert Einstein

.

[undone seal]

Well, you didn't explain why 1+1 should be 2

And what even 2 is

[quasi summit]

We invented the symbol 2 in order to "compressed " and then to"compressed" 1 +1 into "something",we invented a symbol"2" representing always we write 1+1 = 2 , and for 1+3 = 4(its the symbol we made for particular values),which this theorem states tht

ONE theorem -
Always ∀ n, m ∈ ℕ, ∃ v ∈ ℕ such that n + m = v {where v is the new value,symbol}

As we can also define "+"(addition) as ,[n + S(m) = S(n + n)].
and for "=".symboll,its to compress the word "equal to" as same as for "for all" as "∀" respectively. { "=" was invented/introduced by Robert Recorde in 1557}.

and ,

wrong iff The laws of the cosmos never expands ,because to expand ,it needs exponential growth ,but to even have exponential growth it needs a symbol called "*" multiplication, as this axiom proved tht

n × S(m) = (n × m) + n or simply n*b,in all cases,

and to even have this ,it needs continous additon by itself(n) times ∀m ,

Hence,for succesive ℕ (which also includes/can describe ℝ) proves tht 1+1 = 2 as a symbol or a defintion provable , if by no means some can understand ,look at the book rincipia Mathematica,pages r 362 pages(remember 3,6, and 2 r also symbols to "compress" the definition for 1=362).we also uses Piano arithmethic here too!

~Albert Einstein
(2026,)
{revived again}!

https://tenor.com/view/einstein-think-gif-13278067

{actually this was not proven by Einstein,actually,!}

and ONE theorem is totaly made by me

ONLY

[undone seal]

It is a mathematical description of validation of 1+1=2, so you're out

https://tenor.com/view/red-aura-shanks-gif-15239642149115408408

[quasi summit]

so tell me ,does the question aksed to "prove" 1+1 = 2 , or aksed "reinvent" 1+1= 2?,first states this,if its "proves',then my statement did tht pure logically correct,but again if it is "invent"then hence perhaps ,maybe even einstein could really struggle to do this.

[undone seal]

I bet Einstein would knew whether or not a question deserved his thinking

[quasi summit]

YoU r OuT!

https://tenor.com/view/near-death-note-silence-gif-13598267492655521915

[undone seal]

Cry more

[ionic light]

https://tenor.com/view/charlie-kirk-agartha-gif-6211173812848242691

https://tenor.com/view/epstein-agartha-jeffrey-epstein-gif-15389184639175530670

https://tenor.com/view/agartha-ksi-yakub-gif-452903340619560732

https://tenor.com/view/agartha-phonk-agarthan-prince-prince-raw-milk-gif-9649012607715046519

https://tenor.com/view/edp-agartha-epstein-epstein-files-jeffrey-epstein-gif-2048897788483020023

https://tenor.com/view/jeffrey-epstein-agartha-gif-16644716304657787325

https://tenor.com/view/agartha-vril-ashtar-sheran-gif-10695907235911658484

https://tenor.com/view/bog-bogged-bogger-crypto-crypto-bogger-gif-6431190492691726688

[quasi summit]

ok

[cobalt rock]

wth are ts gifs

[dapper wolf]

Can someone tell me the most lamen form of Reimann Hypothesis.

[gritty canopy]

I am a human born with some kind of intuition when I see Another human I believe that he/she exists in our dimensions so I use some kind of symbols humans before me created to make life easier and I say "u and me are the same kind of creatures I believe we're "two" >>> a symbol based on logic in our dimensions

[ionic light]

beautiful gifs

[cobalt rock]

indeed sir

[gilded goblet]

But it's just not true?

1+1 = 1

(George Bool EBK)

[fervent gust]

the fact that you sent this exactly at 11:11 am for me is wild

[shadow imp]

Lamen?

I also kinda find this more something for the general discussion. But not in 1+1 = 2 server 🙂

[remote pike]

does sending a link to a mathematical proof count since the link itself isnt math?

[remote pike]

4097

[weary tree]

I wanna say something, I mean, there is a case that 1+1=1.

[shadow imp]

What case?

[dapper wolf]

i guess that in today's world we only just try to understand what aur fore fathers did. we anretruly not capableof doing something new. the old scientist are the real super human .

truly the old mathematiciant reached new hieghts of achievements. they did what we still cannot

[jagged mural]

Meanwhile PhD people:

[remote pike]

lol

[remote pike]

no they didnt lol .

[split quartz]

We just assign the symbol 2 to the collection of two units

There's nothing to prove here

[remote pike]

set theory ? ? ?

[topaz delta]

A rock and a rock are 2 rocks

Hence 1+1 = 2

[jagged mural]

What if I say that it is π rocks

[jagged mural]

What if some guy assigns the symbol Ω to it

[strong ruin]

one and one means red and red two reds wave means color orange in alternative physics dark rainbow color teory orange is two

also two reds can be 11

[strong ruin]

thgts cheating

[split quartz]

Would work

But you've to fit it in the context of our decimal system

[jagged mural]

Real

[remote pike]

what is two then ?

[split quartz]

By "two" I meant the concept of one and one units

There's no other way we can communicate it

[remote pike]

then what is one ?

[split quartz]

The concept of unity, it predates creation

It's a form

[remote pike]

uni deez nuts ha ha

u fell for it stinky

[split quartz]

It's a platonic form my guy

Let's not engage in sophistry

[remote pike]

i can name more numbers then u buddy

[mortal gorge]

if I find a brick and I put it in a stack with only another of itself I have two, but two is only two for we identified that set as two wholes, really that brick is made of composite material itself on a microscopic level its full of other composites too, and molecular bonding, this item itself is also under the affects of physics all other objects are relative to their body to their forces, if I have two bricks its because we've identified the word for a couple of one set as two, they could've called it waffle I have a waffle over here I need four waffles or 8 , you know.. its all relative, but if I have a brick and I put it on another brick I don't just have one brick anymore, even though the bricks must have even weight that 1 bricks weight = the other that you have one whole if you divided one brick putting one in its place, that a brick next to another brick must be a sign of a a set of bricks plural not brick, that then three must be the start of a series of bricks but then one must identify numbers to make these bricks easier to lay, rather than saying I want series brick + series brick + series brick, ill just say I want 3 + 3 + 3 bricks or ill just say I want 9 bricks , it saves speech it saves thought it saves time. Relatively all is its base composites so wheat is too wheat as there is a microscopic environment to that wheat with its own scale, that there are small creatures on that wheat which live on much smaller scales of infinity than we do, a minute for them is nothing to us, but to them a series of bacteria isnt a thought, but to us what is or isnt a thought due to our scale inflicting our answer, a galaxy is just a set of star systems , a star system is just a set of orbital bodies , and an orbital body is a set of its composites, some beings are sets of galaxies , but to identify such extremisms one too must be able to identify that if I stick two bricks together its no longer just one brick, and in the gap between those bricks perhaps infinity...

"to find two one must first bring one to another"

if one falls from another then its alone

but if a path is for more than one then two must exist

if one was many parts and then one took from those parts one would have incompleteness

if I came to a town with a Donkey then two things came into that town

if I left without my donkey then only one would be returning

if i cut my sandwich in half and only eat half of it I have only ate one of two parts

if I cut my sandwich thrice into three equal portions and give them all away I have zero of my whole

some things are different

if I cut my dollar in half I don't have two dollars just two parts of one defaced dollar

same how scale is relative it is important, if I take from one place to another I take weight from one place to another

if I rip my notebook in half because I need paper elsewhere I have a ripped notebook and half the paper here

if two weights are equal can I stand between those two weights as whole whole above them and balance

thus two equal variables balance one separate whole relying on their balance

that if that balance were undone I would need to offset it myself or the two parts would be unequal and it would slip to the heavier whole

but for one whole to be heavier there has to be more than one whole

but then not all wholes are weighed equally

some wholes must be partialized to become equalized to smaller portions

some smaller portions must be exponentiated and or multiplied to equal larger whole and greater portions

if I look to planets they are not static balls in space, each is base composites varying to its body and its environment

there are n terms on each body for n time for n properties

n comets passing by and n events taking place relative to the events present

time is scale that it is base to how long it takes to orbit your star no matter the solar system

and since time is a base, if you get from this solar system across the galaxy before an hourglass empties on Earth you did not age slower than Earth rather you traveled faster how you would on Earth if you went faster on Earth thus you are just going faster, then if it took you 1/2 the hourglass to reach one side of the galaxy, when you return it would be empty, time is relative to stars but scale is variable to environment thus 24 hours in an Earth day, but Mars day is different, but the amount of time passing overall for the whole of creation is a constant regardless to which face of a being is towards its light or its star which we perceive visually

even if it takes 24 hours for one system to take a full rotation, and 78 in another, or even 892 in an extreme case, the constant time passing overall is the same, it just takes more time for certain events to elapse for the values are only so capable for the forces provided

therefor for n time passing certain events with happen n/their probability or the time it takes for it to happen rather than just because

for n time if it takes 892 time for something to happen and n is all of time for n/892 is how many times it will happen if the scenario remains static

but we say too with Ceres that orbital bodies collapse inward unexpectedly

things happen and for n time there are n events domino'd from each others events

same too in animal populations

for n time n/probability and environment = odds

how famine strikes us itll strike wildlife

over time it will breed and the population of grasshoppers will cultivate over food sources and the more there is the more there will be and the better the environment for habitation the longer they will be there , but the introduction of a predator not only inflicts grasshopper populations it envokes an evolutional change because breeding for the species is a game of survival rather than an environmental oasis

we've seen cases of this in the Dodo who didn't defend itself and was sadly hunted into extinction

over n time for n/br where br = birth rate for a species if the death cap reaches DC > BR , it is a recession, if DC > BR remains static prolonged forever, it remains that eventually BR - DC = - number, thus, - number over time + - number next month = double negative, not product but two negative bases subtracted from each other, - 1000 - 1000 = -2000 , if the birth rate for the grasshoppers was 89 where it was 89 of them in the region produce on average and the deathrate was 150, then those 89 must breed more often and release more offspring on average to overcome the death rate of 150

thus every environment isn't static but variable

and its beings are too variable

that if the environment is thrown off.. the beings are thrown off

then BR completely collapses , DC exponentiates , extinction of local grasshopper population

likely this or migration

but for all of it

there had to be live grasshoppers running around simulation evolution and life overtime surviving encounters with other same scale beings to the point of reproduction to the point of continuation to the point of repeating again to survive as a whole

they had to learn where to put eggs and where to put food and where to be , since they are so small it helps to mass reproduce since if 100 die out of the 1000 it doesn't matter if you're a swarm, if 1000 die out of 10000 they expect it as wild animals, thus in cases of lack of activity and more so instinctuality species mass reproduce, Humans however intelligent see reproduction as sometimes more a right or needing requirements before consolidating another being

we expect less DC to BR for our species as we are larger and require more to nurture

but for ants, they expect to be used as resource for a queen for the colony so they can continue to live

but in this usage of resource they are unaware of their usage of resource it is simply life

in cases of complex largescale life as life speeds up and average scale decreases it becomes less profitable for beings to be hyper sized or extra large

except in cases of deep sea gigantism

when you are left alone its easier to be big, but we've seen large animals hunted simply for being large

thus land animals scale decreases as time increases and as comfort sets average size of dominant species increases

[jagged mural]

Dominant v. Submissive??

[remote pike]

no dominant vs reccesive 💀

also holy yap . .

someone give this diddy blud a yapping medal pls .

[cerulean fox]

a math question without using math?

cause operations like plus are a part of math

arithmetic specifically

[nocturne venture]

1+1 is 2, beacuse if we add elements together, it's supposed to be higher than one or the other one. It's like life, a stair by another stair gets higher.

[nocturne venture]

By a pair of elements {a}+{b}, it's output must be higher than the operation itself which implies: {a}{b}={c} i.e {c}>{a},{b}

[cerulean fox]

That's math

Also this question is dumb

[nocturne venture]

I know. I just sent what I would say if I had the opportunity to prove this with math

[nocturne venture]

Yes, but it would be fun to see how people think.

[cerulean fox]

How can u prove math without math?

[nocturne venture]

You can proove axioms without math.

[cerulean fox]

Aren't axioms those which we assume to be true with no proof?

[nocturne venture]

Axioms don't need to be proven with math, that's true. But it doesn't specify that it can't be proven without math

🤷

[dark ginkgo]

The question is ragebait and everyone fell for it

[cerulean fox]

True that