ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
1 + 1 = 3 Proof | Breaking the rules of mathematics
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 เม.ย. 2021
- 1 + 1 = 3 Proof | Breaking the rules of mathematics.
One plus one equals three is possible only by breaking the rules of mathematics. 1+1=3 is not supported by mathematical logic. These strange results may come by the mistake during the calculations. This viral math tricks video is given here to show a message that a single mistake in mathematical calculations can lead to a destructive result.
The second part of this video containing how to prove 2+2 = 5. Two plus two equals five is an old mathematical illusion that also proves that a mistake in the calculation can make different results. 2+2=5 viral math problem may puzzle anyone. But if someone carefully watches the 2+2=5 video, there is a mistake in the calculation. The secret of 2+2=5 is hidden in its calculation. The ground rules of mathematics were not followed in 2+2=5 calculations.
The third part of this video shows how easy to multiply anything by 11. This fun of mathematics video is intended to show you a message that a simple mistake in mathematical calculations may lead to wrong results.
------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe Matescium: th-cam.com/users/matescium?sub_c...
------------------------------------------------------------
Watch other interesting videos on Matescium
Hacking Someone’s age: • Hacking Someone's Age
You can solve it within 10 seconds: • You can solve it withi...
Mathematics ca prove anything: • Radius of Your Love
5 5 5 = 6 How | 6s Challenge | Part 2: • 5 5 5 = 6 How | 6s Ch...
0 0 0 = 6 How | 6s Challenge: • (0 + 0 + 0) ! = 6 How...
------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for watching it.
#1+1=3 #Mathtricks #Viralmath #1+1=3mathtrick #1+1=3How #1+1=3Proof
3:04 We can't cancel the powers. Cancelling the powers means taking square root, and we always have to take modulus after taking square root
All the best bhaiya ji
@@cyborg029. thanks bhai
no. u can by adding roots on both sides
its basically balancing
@@pros.sherwin8194 what do you mean by adding roots?
Leaving aside the square root step, I like how he uses 1+1 = 2 to get 1+1=3 😂
Absolutely right
xD
Lbird itine born again
@@sayyedzama3648 yes because he's breaking the rules it makes sense
Ikr
For those who are still wondering (1+1=3) why this happened is because In the step where he cancelled the squares on both the sides he did not use the concept of modulus. While taking square root on both sides the value obtained will be inside a mod sign.
Ex: we have [√(x)²] will not be equal to x but will be equal to | x |
2+2 is fish
1+1 is window t@@jenniferfergerson3949
😂😂 how in the world is 2+2 fish ?😂
@@shekkishyjas39522 + a backwards 2 I think
he is wrong at the fourth step, when he removes the square
In the 1st proof i.e 1+1=3, you should not cancel out the square of a negative number on one side and square of a positive number in another side.3:04
In the 2nd proof i.e 2+2=5, you should not cancel out the expression whose sum adds up to zero(0) in any equation. 6:08
Math developers: Sorry for the inconvenience, we will patch this bug in the next update.
Lol
Lmao 😭
@@username_19388 you cried to death right
This comment is everything.
Lol😂
This is what happens when you miss the basics of mathematics and think yourself as mathematical genius 🤣
Yes lol😂😼
Bro he's making it just for fun
But he seems serious.
@@hasibulislamshanto143 ya he serius
He seriusly making a joke
When A "Mathematics Genius" Wanna Take A Challenge
The issue arises at 3:01 because after taking the square root on both sides of the equation, the result needs to be an absolute value. Therefore, the correct step should be |4-5| = |6-5|, meaning 5-4 = 6-5.
هنا تم تلاعب و وهمنا بالوصول إلى برهان الصحيح.
Plus he forgot the rest of the equation the (2×4x5) and the (2x6x5)
Bravo!
@@DaUseless1no he did not he just use an identity (x+y)² = x²+y² - 2xy
@@dragonyt4046 just fun bro
the step where the squares are removed is where you take the square root of both sides, but the square root of a value has two possible values (one positive, and one negative). when the signs are taken into account you resolve the issues.
In the second calculation your cancellation step involves dividing by the value within the brackets (4-3-1), however given 4-3-1 is zero you are dividing both side by zero. The problem is dividing any integer by zero gives the result of infinity (so the correct result would be infinity = infinity).
He himself proved, maths rules are universal, hence can't be defied.....
Hence proved!!!
OH YEA WHAT ABOUT THIS
1+1=11
This is cap because you cant get from 1 to three because there are infinite decimal numbers In between 1 and 3 like 1.1
Second step is wrong .........ri8 one should be (16+25)-40 = (36+25)-60 ....Simple rules of mathematics
@@artix755 also, go take a pen (1) , go take another pen (1), if you join them, another pen wont just randomly appear…
Legends are shock after seeing this calculation 😱
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I have gud proof: 1 dad + 1 mom = 1 child = 3 people
1 dad plus 1 mom pregnant with twins = 2 children=4 people 🧐🧐🧐
@@michaelmoorer1523 we ignore that
That's 1+1+1.
But if they stay united could that still be 1?
In the first case, 1+1 = 3, you reached the following equation:
There you removed the parenthesis power from both sides. while on the right side you can write (4-5) or (5-4) which means 4-5=-1 or 5-4=1 and on the left side you can write 5-6=-1 or Write 6-5=1. In other words, the square root of both sides has two answers: 1 and -1.
You deliberately ignored the -1 from the left side and set it equal to 1 on the right.
This is where the path to the wrong conclusion begins.
Yes, the fact that (-1)^2=(1)^2 does not mean that -1=1. Also it is true root of G^2 is both -G and G!
Це відео для тих хто погано вчився у школі.
LOL 5 minutes ago@@yurchenko_vadim
Sorry, I can't read Russia@@yurchenko_vadim
@@georgesmith2667 it is not Russian, but Ukrainian. When I was reading the comments, there was an opportunity to automatically translate comments written in English or some other language into Ukrainian, so I wrote a comment thinking that you would also press the button and translate it into your language. And I wrote in the previous comment that this video is for those who did not study well at school.
You shouldn't ignore the negative roots. You should put x in √(x²) into a absolute-value and reach a meaningful equation.
If x^2 = a
The x= +a^(1/2) or -a^(1/2)
In general there is no problem in neglecting the negative root , but in some cases we discard the positive roots. Actually , it is not a function.
F(a) = b , F(a) = c where b =\= c implies F is a Mapping but not a function.
Ok
Серьезно!!!
@@esseandessence4421 urmom
@@esseandessence4421 smart man
@@LORD-px9tv 9
In second calculation.
4(4-3-1)=5(4-3-1)
We can not cancel (4-3-1) from both sides, becoz the value of the term is zero and "0÷0" *is not defined* not "1" .
For better understanding
0=0
3×0=4×0
If we zero from both sides
Then
3=4
So thats why we cant say 0÷0 is 1
Its just not defined.
Absolutely nonsense... Wrong calculations...
This is like an advanced Abbot and Costello skit😂
(a-b)^2 = (b-a)^2 whereas (a-b) is not equal to (b-a); so you proved in a wrong way.
Nice...m
It doesn't. Your formula is broken because you have two different values for x. On arrow line 3 you have x=4 y=5 on left side, then x=6 y=5 on right hand. The 6 should be a "z" "a" etc. so in principle your formula becomes (x-y)2-2xy=(z-y)2-2zy. So here you are considering "1" as a variable value, so then of course it could be equal to 3. But this logic you have shown above does not break the rules of mathematics.
Bro x can have two different values in nature
He likes Math and Physics, Math and Physics doesn't like him
@@hockeyworld818 read it again😁
You fool we can take rhs as x and y and lhs as a and b than no problem
in which class do u read ? xD
even though if it was different values , you can see (4-5)=(6-5) and square on each of them .... after solution we will get -1 square=1 square which is again equal to the starting (1=1)
3:12; he just canceled the squares so if we just solve what's inside the bracket we get (-1)^2 = (1)^2 which is true since the square of a negative number is positive but after canceling the squares he wrote -1 = 1 which is not true and if we take the square root of (-1)^2 we get 1 so the correct thing after 3:12 would be 1 = 1 which is true
Yes
Yes. His whole point is depending on this very wrong deduction. And he just ignored the most important part of square root.
he should have put the absolute value
Yes you are right you can't cancel power like that
Damn! It's very true!
teacher : "the test isn't that hard" the test:
About 2 + 2 = 5
The (4 - 3 - 1) = 0 =>
We cannot divide both sides of an equality by zero. This is one of the states of ambiguity.
First we need to clear this ambiguity and then divide.
When you have 4(4 - 3 - 1) = 5(4 - 3 - 1) => clear (4 - 3 - 1) from both sides of the equation, means, you divided
4(4 - 3 - 1) /(4 - 3 - 1) = 5(4 - 3 - 1)/(4 - 3 - 1) => (4 x 0)/0 = (5 x 0)/0
Zero when divided by zero in the denominator means ambiguity
You are going against basic BODMAS (Brackets, Order, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction) rule or PEMDAS (Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction) rule that is why you are getting the wrong result. In your first 2 examples brackets should be solved first.
He wrote in the tiltle breaking the rules of maths
@@theenjoyfullshorts188 at 4:22 he asked anyone to comment where he had made an error
Bodmas is brackets order division multiplication addition subtraction
@@audio4642 yes right thanks, I have updated. I think my point makes sense
in my point of view its good to say proof 2≠3 instead of you said 1+1=3 you have to showed that 2≠3
You can't cancel the squares, it's just for our convenience. The importance of brackets is the base of mathematics. I did the same mistake, but in another equation in class 8th, then after wondering for hours, I found out that this is the wrong way.
Exactly what I'm saying, you CANNOT cancel the squares.
Ya same with me
breaking the rules with wrong methods,first learn every concept of maths then come to make it wrong, okk my son
*When a 6th grader watches this be like*
@@RainzOn270Hz he will amazed how this happened
when you remove the squares from both sides, you must make sure that each side is a positive root or each is negative.
If you're a budding mathematician, this video is absolutely correct in what it is trying to demonstrate.
Authors of comments offering destructive or instructive criticism may have failed to read the video description 😂
6:24 I apologize if my previous responses were unclear. You are absolutely correct. Dividing by zero is undefined in mathematics, and that's where the error in your original manipulation occurs. When you divided both sides by (4-3-1), you were effectively dividing by zero, which is not a valid operation. This is why the conclusion that 4 = 5 is incorrect.
Thank you for clarifying, and I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous responses. If you have more questions or need further assistance, please feel free to ask.
Bro copied from chatgpt 💀
@@balck_ 💀💀
@@balck_💀
bro really thought we wouldn’t notice the essence of chat gpt here 😂
I can hear Sheldon Cooper's condescending laugh😂😂
We use the x and y in equations to try and find out an unknown number
4 is a known number
hence why we can't get the 5 to the other side as positive 5
That is the strongest and the most uncomprehendable accent i've ever heard
(4-5)²=(6-5)²
RHS=√(6-5)²=+(6-5) or -(6-5) Only one value can be correct which is -(6-5)
Same case in LHS
If LHS is (4-5) RHS must be -(6-5)
Whaaaa
Say whaaaaaaaa
I had a stroke reading that
Witch spelling is wrong
Correct spelling is WHICH
@@gorlajyothi4452 thanks
Exponents don't cancel. You would have to take the square root of each side, which then makes each side ±. If you want to simplify it you could take the absolute value of each side: |4-5|=|6-5| => |-1|=|1| => 1=1
true
L anime use normal pfps
a²=b²=>a=b is false then next step he wrote -1 = 1 hahaha
You don't cancel the square of both sides like addition or subtraction..
Cause square element always has two values..
The step right after taking the square roots on both sides ...
4 - 5 = 6 - 5 means
- 1 = + 1
This was where the rules of arithmetic broke down, at 3:10
And at 6:01 the expression in brackets (4 - 3 - 1) evaluates to 0.
Cancelling (4 - 3 - 1) on both sides is the same as dividing by 0 on both sides.
Division by 0 is not allowed by the rules of arithmetic.
When you remove the squares, you have to calculate the absolute value of the sub-radical number
o que isso afeta o grêmio?
Dunno what you just said but I agree.
2:42 can also be as (5-4)^2
If you remove the squares +- term is used so that the product varies
Taking positive and negative term differently gives you different answers out of them you get (1, something else)you can't directly consider it as true
he didn't divide numbers that have the same value, that's it
OMG..🤯
This is already a silly proof , anyone can do this , ahhh
@@hatimwarrior Then why didn't you comment before him..? 🥴
Your answer is comment is best of all
This is like a layer finding a legal loophole where it doesn't exist
i knew bro cooked, when he said, "they cancel each other"
Teacher:what is 1+1=?
Me:hard question, its 3.
Teacher:Huh, what are you talking about? Prove it its 3.
Me:
(4-5)^2 = (6-5)^2
Does not imply: 4-5 = 6-5 rather what it does imply is that:
|(4-5)| = |(6-5)|
=> |-1| = |1|
=> 1 = 1
So 1 + 1 = 2 is the only possible outcome and 1 + 1 = 3 is not possible.
Thx a lot bro
Ok i am 9 and i do yr 7 work and ppl like u saying dis stuff me: boi what did u just say
yeap.but was a good clickbait😂watched the hole vid
@@teamverity191 im 9,9 im almost 10
Not “0”? 😂
2:35 begins the failure. Xs and Ys in both sides aren't the same in value, so they're not giving the right equation.
Who knew a simple math equation could be so confusing?
"BECAUSE OF THE GOVERNMENT-" I can never not think about this while watching this video
1996 omar
Chill bro 1+1 is not 3 he did wrong way the he made left side other way and right side other way left was (5-4)**2 he did just wrong way
And **2 can't be minus so (4-5)**2 is not number
@@mariorobles7924 why
@@raghav2496 iLiAS iLiAS F0RTNlTE adonnés TH-cam 😀🤣🤣🤣
when you took square root both sides, they should open with both plus minus sign. Because as we know that both 2 and -2 have same square i.e 4.
Imagine trying to teach a child what 1+1 is if you're this guy
Let's go through the series of mathematical operations step by step to identify the errors:
1. The initial statement "1 + 1 = 3" is boxed at the top as the proposition being proven.
2. They start with a true statement "1 = 1" to begin the manipulation.
3. The following step, "41 - 40 = 61 - 60," is correct as both sides equal 1.
4. They then proceed to "16 + 25 - 40 = 36 + 25 - 60." This step is valid because 16 + 25 = 41 and 36 + 25 = 61, with both sides subtracting the same amount, resulting in 1 = 1.
5. The next line, "4^2 + 5^2 - 2*4.5 = 6^2 + 5^2 - 2*6.5," is also correct. Here they're expanding the squared terms (4^2 and 6^2) and including the middle term of the binomial expansion which would indeed cancel out to give 1 = 1 if the terms were correct.
6. But the operation that follows, "(4 - 5)^2 = (6 - 5)^2," is incorrect. They've incorrectly simplified the previous step. What should have happened here is that the left side would be 4^2 - 2*4*5 + 5^2 and the right side would be 6^2 - 2*6*5 + 5^2, and you cannot just cancel out the middle terms independently since they are not like terms.
7. Proceeding from the false equivalence "(4 - 5)^2 = (6 - 5)^2," they correctly calculate that (4 - 5)^2 = (-1)^2 = 1 and (6 - 5)^2 = 1^2 = 1. However, this is based on the previous incorrect simplification.
8. The next line "4 - 5 = 6 - 5" incorrectly assumes that if two squares are equal, then their roots must be equal, without considering that squaring is not a one-to-one function. Squaring eliminates negative signs, so while the squares may be equal, the original numbers may have been negatives of each other.
9. They then incorrectly cancel out the "-5" from both sides, which is not valid algebraic manipulation.
10. From there, they reach "4 = 6," which is obviously incorrect, but then they add "+5" to both sides, maintaining the incorrect equality.
11. Dividing by 2 on both sides, they get "2 = 3," which is a continuation of the error.
12. They conclude with "1 + 1 = 3," circled at the bottom, based on the erroneous steps above.
The most glaring mathematical error is the step from (4 - 5)^2 to 4 - 5, assuming that because the squares are equal, the bases must be equal as well. This overlooks the fact that both positive and negative numbers yield the same square, so this does not hold when removing the square. The subsequent steps are based on this incorrect simplification, leading to the incorrect conclusion.
But 4-50
So you cant delete the square because you can delete it only when the 2 values smaller ,equale 0 or when the 2values are bigger ,equale 0
Sorry for my rip english 😅
No. You can remove square but they gonna have absolute symbols “ | | “ (4-5)^2 -> |(4-5)| (6-5)^2 -> |(6-5)|
Then you have |(4-5)| = |(6-5)| |-1| = |1| then 1=1.
yeh so there's the problem
√a with a
@@manow_ch7918 respect bro
1+1=3
In the 4th line you skipped half the action and since then it can not stand there a sign equals
2+2=5
Cannot be divided by 0
4-3-1=0
By shortening we divide both sides by 0
11 is magic 😁
Sorry for the tragic English
2:21 "eeks! mynus why? Holy sqare."
3:04 A new Ramanujam is born. Cancelling powers and leaving our the products.
😂😂😂😂😂
Don't just cancel the power here, do square root instead :-
(4 - 5)² = (6 - 5)²
Or, √-1² = √1²
Here in basic mathematics, we can't find square root of -1.
So you can't prove 1 + 1 = 3.
According to step 2, root of something is always "+" or "-" we cannot just cancel the squares like that. And also we can write (a-b)^2 as (b-a)^2. If you solve the problem by putting (b-a)^2 then you'll get 1+1 = 2 as the answer... and in the title you have written "breaking the rules of mathematics" so, for this video, it's okay
I definetly understand u 😢
My head hurts listening to his voice as well as his misleading math
Ok
I realize that things gone wrong because of eliminating power 2 ,but i don't khow what the reason,your explanation make me clear.
can you know the reason why 2+2=5 in the second solving.
Exactly... I had the same catch of mistake... "+Or-" in either side is cumpolsary
When your teacher testing you what is 1 + 1 is...
Me: 3
Teacher: why
Me: *struggling to explain*
You can't simply choose to cancel powers without affecting the rest of the equation.
When cancelling the square, you should use (+ or -) in the first sum.
In the seciond sum you cancel (4-3-1). Here you must understand that this cancellation means you are dividing both sides by (4-3-1). It means you are dividing both sides by zero. So the resul is "infinity =infinity", and not " 4=5".
And -1≠1
In first part, if x²=y²
Doesn't mean x is always equals to y so you can't simply cancel power,
They will only be equal if x and y both are positive or both negative.
In second part what you did was dividing 0/0 which is also not defined.
because 4-3-1 = 0. You can't cancel 0 from both sides that way.
You are bhuskhonda aadmi
108
If powers are the same then it's correct
@@passykiraboIf you're talking about the first part, then if you look carefully in 5th line he wrote
⇛(4 - 5)² = (6 - 5)²
which can also be written as
⇛ (-1)² = (1)²
Until this line it was correct as square of -1 is equal to square of 1 but due to this you can't say -1 = 1
and that's what he did he actually equated (-1 = 1) but wrote it in different way
like this: 4 - 5 = 6 - 5
And people might have believed it true (not everyone).
Hope you understand my complicated explanation😅
I tried my best to explain.
When dealing with an equation with no variables,you cannot shift stuff from left hand side to right hand side and vice versa.
you can
5 + 4 = 10 - 1
is the same as
5 = 10 - 1 - 4
Woman: How many balls do you have?
Man: 1+1=3
😂😂
Apart form what my fellow mathematics professors have pointed out as error, I saw it fitting to add that this guy is grossly wrong by considering that 2=3 and or 4=5 : at this point it's a mathematical contradiction. Two distinct objects say a, b will be equal to three distinct objects say a, b, c .. ie a,b != a, b, c
There were two roots when you eliminated the square .there you can shift one square to other side and then use a²-b²=(a-b)(a+b) where a-b is actually a imaginary root in this case while a+b is a perfect root which satisfies the rules of mathematics and makes us feel what we studies was not wrong. Read it fully if you want to know the truth
My man, u got the first
Let me tell u about 2nd
He took 0=0
But in actuality
0/0 = it can be infinity and also it can be any number
Bro some people think it is true 🤣 from where he cancle the roots from both sides.
😐
Nerd lol
@@Deaddeyess another fact is that
0/oo =0 (oo = infinity)
In the second case,since 4-3-1=0 we can not cancel it out from both sides of an equation, as dividing by zero is not allowed.
when proving a mathematical statement with an equal sign don't we take one side manipulate it till its the one on the right?
6:25
In the second proof (2+2=5) in the third step when you took 4 from a side and 5 from another, in the remaining brackets the sum of numbers were equal to 0 and therefore:
4(0)=5(0)=0
And 0s can’t cancel out due to mathematical logic (unidentified)
Math teachers are afraid of this guy
Ahhahq
Powers over numbers can't be cancelled . That's the point you missed and didn't follow . So you've been able to prove 1=3
Mathematics is confused in itself 😂😂😂
In the second calculation he cant cancel 4-3-1 on both sides because it means he is dividing 0 on both sides and division by zero is undefined.
Truly breaking mathematics rule, by cancelling the Powers 😀👍
I clicked on this thinking this is a joke 💀
it is impossible to abbreviate the second degrees, as it is expressions (A - В) (A - В) = (С - D) (C - D), but A - B not equal С - D, so, abbreviating is impossible.
5:37 bro is the mathematics equivalent of Glenn Beck 🤣
3:05 if u want to get rid of powers u need to put sqrt on both sides which will result in the left 1 (4-5) that is -1 to transform into 1 cuz of ABS.
@@takshilsharma4036 Nah
there's no minus nember inside the root ( rules )
When removing the squares u have to put +-. For ex: ( (-1)^2 = (1)^2 ) this equation is correct, now if you remove the square u can't say -1 = 1 . But say | -1 | = | 1 | so that the negative is removed so 1 = 1 ...
Now for (4-5)^2 = (6-5)^2 it's the same concept. Removing the squares: |4-5| = |6-5|
To simplify it further: | -1 | = | 1 |, which is just 1=1
I don’t know who u are, what u are and where u are but i will find u and i will get u a job to Nasa
@@GjigantiChannel 🤣🤣
This advance math algorithm was invented by the youtuber during his first night with his gf to prove 0"=6". She had to agree in grief.
когда мы вычисляем корень из х², то х надо писать под модулем |x|.
таким образом 5 строка будет выглядеть как |4 - 5| = |6 - 5| => |-1| = |1| => 1 = 1.
это правило надо помнить, чтобы не возникало таких "странных" уравнений))
(a-b)^2 = (c-d)^2 doesnt mean a-b = c-d you forgot the case that a-b or c-d is a minus number which multiply by itself still equals the opposite of the number multiply by that one too
(4-5)²=(6-5)²
That means : (4-5)×(4-5) = (6-5)×(6-5)
so you can't remove the square because
(4-5)≠(6-5)
Bro both square can be remove
I don't know but...
If you have 1 paper and another person give you 1 more paper then will it be 3 paper?
@@yogeswaran.m if you want to remove the square you must take the square root of both sides so :
(4-5)² = (6-5)²
✓(4-5)² = ✓(6-5)²
| 4-5 | = | 6-5 |
5-4 = 6-5
1=1 ✓✓✓
Bro there is one another property if power are equal then we write only base.
A^3=B^3 or (any other Higher power) A=B
Mahanubhav (4-5)^2 nahi (5-4)^2 hoga ye aapne mistake kiya.
Aapko gyat hona chahiye when we prove irrationality of √2 Or other irrational no. We do it by an argument and general observation.
In Mathematics Or while proposing any theory it is checked that it should explain general observation and not that it is contradictory to common result. For e.g.
While calculating time in kinematics sometimes we get.
t^2=4
Hence t=+2 and -2.
We know that -2 has no significance in time calculation we just neglect that result
Flat Earthers: I Have Proof The Earth Is Flat!
Their Proof:
Oh bro we can cut the powers when bases are same 😂😂
Him : explain hard way
AFTER 3 DAYS LATER
Him: so that's how thanks for watc
Me:WAIT
Him: why
Me: 1+1=11
People: OHHHHHHHHHH
2:45 use equation correctly
At 3:52 , he only agrees that 2 is 1+1 😂
If the exponent of a power is even and the base is not negative, when you take the root, the result comes out within the absolute value.
If I write this 1+1=3 in my exam ,my teacher kick me out from the exam hall, I know sir your mathematics 1+1=3 is also correct, but for small students 1+1=2 only😢😢😢
For me it's true, sis😢😢
Ap kite years k ho?
True ;-;
@@btsblkpik5650 Hlo I am also Blink and Army💜
Do you like Kdrama??
@@Kamal55984 not much but yah I like little bit😊😊
And I thought the American education system was bad…
Rooting on both sides is not like squaring on both sides because squaring on both the sides for +ve as -ve numbers gives a +ve number but for rooting on both the sides it's not the case so absolute value should be taken
Dude learned math from TikTok
When you remove the squared exponent, you must have absolute values on both sides
2:51 people passed 7th or 8th also knows what he has done wrong😀😀
This is what happens when you only took "Maths literacy" as subject.
What formula is that your using?
In the first case you must use absolute value, in the second one you can't divide by 0
Tui faul player
Its his proof, i knew you cant divide by 0 but thats his proof
When 2nd question ur don't follow rules at 4 th step.
(4-3-1=0 & 4-3-1=0) so zero divide by zero that value going to be infinity ..so we can't divide that case
If we take the example of a quadratic equation where we get two values or roots of x one is positive and one is negative , because there is a square on X ,you ignored that part .
It's been a while and I could be wrong, but when you eliminate the power of 2, you are eliminating a procedure like taking out a plus or minus symbol or even a multiplacation or division symbol. Basically, saying a*a=b*b and you want to eliminate that multiplication.
W + T = F 0:52
Thats why every time my parents says don't miss the maths class
U can't just eliminate those squares, because elimination of squares means you're applying a root on the numbers, but, as we know in mathematics, you can't apply the root on negative numbers, as you did with (4-5)...
You'll have to use absolute symbols, but you'll end up returning to 1=1
Yeah u r right,,
also,
1=1
√1= √1
-1 = 1 (√1= 1, -1)
This is how this math creates the problem🤣
@@theterminator9393 but it's more correct to right
√1^2= 1 *OR* √1^2= -1
i might be wrong but u actually can....
lets say a square= b square
we can say a and b are equal because they have the same square and similarly lets say
(a-b)whole square = (c-b) whole square
we can say by looking at this that (a-b)= (c-b)because if we take the square of one side to the other, it becomes square root.
this proves a and c are the same number when they arent.... and might just be the negative version of the same number. i think he isnt actually wrong... he has made the entire equation quadratic which is why there are 2 values on the lhs and rhs. one is 1+1 = 3 and the other is 1+1 = 0. idk what absolute symbols are but what he has done is definitely not wrong even though the root of -1 is an imaginary number if we take it in the form of variables we get this as the answer. he doesnt break any rule of mathematics but you are not supposed to make an equation quadratic if its possible to solve it like this. we could use the same logic and make it a cubic equation which will give 3 values for 1+1
square root of a negative number is possible in the COMPLEX NUMBER SYSTEM. The notation "i" is used.
The “error” is saying you can just cancel the “squares”. Basically he could have said from the start (-1)^2 = 1 = (1)^2. If you then cancel the “squares” you have -1 = 1, which obviously isn’t right!
Basically in the formula it doesn’t distinguish whether it is y or x that is negative so he chose in a way that he could the cancel the squares leaving the incorrect paradox
Step 6: you canceled out -5 + 5 for 0 leaving 4 = 6, assuming that its 4 = 6 - (5+5), when in reality bedmas states that division & multiplication (we'll call this DM) and addition & subtraction (well call this AS) are not in that exact order but DM are equal to eachother, aswell as AS basically meaning that if either are in a calculation, it is does left to right in regards to said functions. e.g. 6 - 5 + 5 does NOT equal 4, but 6. so you cant cancel -5 + 5.
When you cancel the squares both positive and negative value needs to be taken, there is not any contradiction in this, you just need to do it correctly
Yep exactly
2
3:05 bro cancelling powers, or taking square root has to have "+or-"
We can't cancel out the square and also can't write -5 on the right side.
A big mistake. When you take square roots on both sides, you gorgot + or - . You have to consider the - case as well and select the logic case