I don't mean what you think I mean. Me and my friends have developed a different code of talking, but I got carried away a little and used it here too.
you think that's funny eh? Fucκers.
[OK, to cancell (a^2 - ab) from both sides in the last step, I divided by (a^2 - ab) (as I had explained). But since (a^2 - ab) is 0, then I divided by zero. That's the fallacy.]
"Boobytrap"
example: 4x = 4y <=> x = y I cancelled 4 from both sides.
Close, try again.
So you want me to give you the answer or let you try some more?
Of course they can. x=y Haven't you heard of this before? It's graph is the second declesion of the x-axis and the y-axis. Just an example. Really? Then how did I prove it?
There's nothing mathematically wrong to it (let a=b).
Yes it's true, I factor 2 from the left side and 1 from the right side.
Well, want me to give you some more time to think about it or just give you the answer?
eMule ftw.
Yes, very specific but even though, I proved that 1=2. Why should your thinking be true and not mine? You're right but you haven't stated clearly what forbidden step I did. It's the most forbidden thing in maths. Know what I'm saying? You've said the 99% of the answer but you're stuck in there!
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/09/18/actor.cat.cruelty.ap/index.html "NEW YORK (AP) -- Trial has begun for a baseball player-turned-actor accused of brutally killing a cat in a jealous rage after complaining that his ex-girlfriend cared more for the furry feline than she did for him. Assistant District Attorney Leila Kermani said the cat named Norman died with broken teeth, broken ribs, a broken leg, a torn tongue, massive internal injuries including bruised lungs and a bruised liver and a chest cavity filled with blood. "The defendant, in a fit of anger and rage, beat a defenseless animal to death," Kermani told the jury in her opening remarks Wednesday. "The defendant killed Norman simply because he was an angry, jealous and drunken bully." And get this, his lawyer says "This was a tragic accident," Hochbaum said. "It was not intentional." Here's the picture of the monster, Joseph Petcka, 37. Kill him if you see him walking in the street.
It's true but that has nothing to do with the fallacy. C'mon guys you're almost there, do some logical thinking and you'll find the mistake.
But what is forbidden there? Can you tell?
Nope. There's no need to factor everything that can be factored. I factored only 2, which can be done. Not exactly, but close. There's nothing wrong with this. In one step I did something that cannot happen. I hope you've found it by the time I come back tomorrow.
Nope... I cancel them because they're the same. If I divide by (a^2-ab) both sides, the first side will have 2*1 and the second side will have 1*1. Thus 2 = 1
Actually, no. There is nothing wrong with what you have underlined, I deduct (I'm not sure if that's the right word; you know, remove, minus.) "2ab" from both sides not only from the first. You can't do anything only in one side, you must do it in both.
Let a = b. Then we multiply by "a" both sides: a^2 = ab. We add a^2: a^2 + a^2 = a^2 + ab <=> 2a^2 = a^2 + ab Minus 2ab: 2a^2 - 2ab = a^2 + ab - 2ab <=> 2a^2 - 2ab = a^2 - ab This can also be written as: 2(a^2 - ab)=1(a^2 - ab) and cancelling (a^2 - ab) from both sides gives us: 2 = 1 Can you find the mistake?
