brunokiller Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 ^ can't take the root of a negative number because there is no number which, multiplied by itself, gives a negative. He never took the square root though. In conventional mathematics without complex numbers, you can't even write down -1^0.5 Doesn't it just work out to be -1 though? -1^0,5 =/= -1 It's i. My blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiriyama Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Yeah okay, I'll take your word for it. Honestly, things get complicated as soon as someone introduces the concept of infinity. Denizen of Darkness| PSN= sworddude198 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunokiller Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limit_(mathematics) Closest you will ever get to infinity in normal math class :P My blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydrasil Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 (1^(1/2)/-1^(1/2)) = (-1^(1/2)/1^(1/2)) 1/i =- i/1 1/i = -i As 1^0.5 x -1^0.5 = i,both sides times i. 1 = 1. I was about to show the exact same thing but without the complex numbers. Your way works just the same though : : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 - [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20Rice04 Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 ^ can't take the root of a negative number because there is no number which, multiplied by itself, gives a negative. incorrect, use of the integer I or J in physics allows the root of a negative number. the actual mistake is the belief that the root of an entire fraction is the same as the root of the nominator and denominator, this is infact FALSE fo all all numbers belonging to the set of real numbers. Look guys... I absolutely must be a mass baby-seal murderer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmcannibalism Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 ^ can't take the root of a negative number because there is no number which, multiplied by itself, gives a negative. incorrect, use of the integer I or J in physics allows the root of a negative number. the actual mistake is the belief that the root of an entire fraction is the same as the root of the nominator and denominator, this is infact FALSE fo all all numbers belonging to the set of real numbers. to be technical, no number can be written that is the square root of a negative number, we use things such as i to allow work that involves such "complex" numbers. Orthodoxy is unconciousnessthe only ones who should kill are those who are prepared to be killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wild_goat_14 Posted May 16, 2009 Author Share Posted May 16, 2009 (1^(1/2)/-1^(1/2)) = (-1^(1/2)/1^(1/2)) 1/i =- i/1 1/i = -i As 1^0.5 x -1^0.5 = i,both sides times i. 1 = 1. I was about to show the exact same thing but without the complex numbers. Your way works just the same though : : Or the fast way... -1=-1 -1(-1)=-1(-1) 1=1 I know you are just disproving someone else's equation, I just really had the urge to post that. I shall take my flock underneath my own wing, and kick them right the [bleep] out of the tree. If they were meant to fly, they won't break their necks on the concrete.So, what is 1.111... equal to?10/9. Please don't continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20Rice04 Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 ^ can't take the root of a negative number because there is no number which, multiplied by itself, gives a negative. incorrect, use of the integer I or J in physics allows the root of a negative number. the actual mistake is the belief that the root of an entire fraction is the same as the root of the nominator and denominator, this is infact FALSE fo all all numbers belonging to the set of real numbers. to be technical, no number can be written that is the square root of a negative number, we use things such as i to allow work that involves such "complex" numbers. you can write it it's just not technically correct as i itself can neither be positive or negative, how silly we humans are :wall: :P Look guys... I absolutely must be a mass baby-seal murderer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I don't have a mind for maths, unfortunately. Whenever I think of a mathematical problem I do best to keep it simple and, if possible, think of each unit as a physical object. For example, I rationalise dividing by zero to be nonsensical because you can't divide a number of objects into zero groups. They'll always be in groups, even if it's just groups of one. Then you might have a mind for physics, where every number has set significance and you are not left in a void of variables and symbols with no meaning. Perhaps. I think that I have a mind for molecular biology more than anything else. It's all easily understandable on a physical level. It's too late to seriously consider any other field of science anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathdrow Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 god I love these math threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris5000 Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 infinity x 0 x 2 = 1 infinity x 0 = 0 0 x 2 = 0 (not 1) Whats next. Are you goign to discard the fabric of life by proving; 1+1 does not = 2? Or that the trig functions are incorrect? Or you can magically apply pytharogas's theoreom to a equilateral triangles... (Yes it is possible, I realise that...) EDIT: Yeah, I just read the first post ;-; I failed epically. But yeah, people have been applying wrong algebraic equations, etc... (silly people) Luck be a Lady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l0l0lpur34 Posted May 23, 2009 Share Posted May 23, 2009 If you can find the error here I'll be bloody impressed :P -1 = -1 (1/-1) = (-1/1) (1^(1/2)/-1^(1/2)) = (-1^(1/2)/1^(1/2)) multpily by 1^(1/2).-1^(1/2) and you get 1= -1 Q.E.D PLAWKS? (1^(1/2)/-1^(1/2)) = (-1^(1/2)/1^(1/2)) 1/i =- i/1 1/i = -i As 1^0.5 x -1^0.5 = i,both sides times i. 1 = 1. I was about to show the exact same thing but without the complex numbers. Your way works just the same though : : the rule sqrt(a) * sqrt(B) = sqrt(ab) only applies for real numbers, and sqrt(-1) isn't a real number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cacmypants Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Lol, may I ask... why? WHY!? :wall: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now