Search results
Sofizmat - Czy 2+2=5? Znaleźć błąd w rozumowaniu lub uznać za prawidłowe. W nawiasie (4-3-1) zapisano liczbę 4-3-1=0, a następnie równanie obustronnie zostało podzielone przez (4-3-1) czyli 0.
- Starszy post
Starszy post - Blog matematyczny Minor | Matematyka: Czy...
- Nowszy post
Nowszy post - Blog matematyczny Minor | Matematyka: Czy...
- Błędy w rozumowaniu
Chętnie wyświetlilibyśmy opis, ale witryna, którą oglądasz,...
- Kolejność Wykonywania Działań
Kolejność Wykonywania Działań - Blog matematyczny Minor |...
- Starszy post
28 wrz 2017 · A user asks what's wrong with a fake proof that 2+2=5, which involves cancelling squares and ignoring signs. Several answers explain the flaw in the proof and provide alternative explanations.
2 + 2 = 5 or two plus two equals five is a mathematical falsehood which is used as an example of a simple logical error that is obvious to anyone familiar with basic arithmetic . The phrase has been used in various contexts since 1728, and is best known from the 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell .
16 sie 2020 · A question about whether 2+2=5 is possible in some number systems, with answers involving modular arithmetic and counterexamples. See definitions, properties, and examples of addition and equality in different systems.
A talk about the impossibility of proving that 2+2=5, using Euclid's Axiom and other examples of proofs that there is no proof. A celebration of human mind and logic, not a mathematical proof.
Here's what your "proof" would look like correcting all the errors. As you can see, it's not nearly as impressive as a proof that 2+2=5.
2 sty 2016 · It is epistemically possible that 2+2=5 is provable in FOPA, but, since FOPA also can prove 2+2=4 and ~(4=5), that would show FOPA inconsistent. Gentzen did prove the consistency of Peano Arithmetic, but his proof relies upon mathematical induction up to epsilon-0, and is thus no use in persuading those sceptical of the consistency of PA.
