I'm bad a math someone help, I have to hand in this assignment to my grade 2 teacher tomorrow.
EDIT: I got it wrong and got detention, you guys suck.
EDIT: I got it wrong and got detention, you guys suck.
forum
If 2+2=5 and 1+1=11 what's 2+1?
posted
Total Posts
55
2+1=4 silly
Now go do the equation yourself before I tell on you
Now go do the equation yourself before I tell on you
2+1 can be anything but 3
unless this has some sort of geometrical catch, your question is not solvable, because we don't know how 2 and 1 relate to each other within your system. And even if we knew, the solution would probably too be arbitrarily redefined by you.
definitely 8
so 2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798. If 1^2 is 11, then the same principle applies, making 1 equal to 11^(1/2), or 3.31662479036. If we add these two, we get 5.55269277036.
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
so 2 = 2.23606798 ?IntelliTroodon wrote:
so 2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798. If 1^2 is 11, then the same principle applies, making 1 equal to 11^(1/2), or 3.31662479036. If we add these two, we get 5.55269277036.
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
why would you even bother going though with that procedure after you got something like that. You can't just apply the commonly accepted system to his. It's like trying to binary code in hexadecimal, throwing letters at my computer to see what he makes with them.
you're going completely wrong here, 2+2=/=2^2 and 1+1=/=1^2 so your whole calculation is useless.IntelliTroodon wrote:
so 2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798. If 1^2 is 11, then the same principle applies, making 1 equal to 11^(1/2), or 3.31662479036. If we add these two, we get 5.55269277036.
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
yes, 2=2.23606798, that was the entire point of the equationsRailey2 wrote:
so 2 = 2.23606798 ?IntelliTroodon wrote:
so 2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798. If 1^2 is 11, then the same principle applies, making 1 equal to 11^(1/2), or 3.31662479036. If we add these two, we get 5.55269277036.
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
why would you even bother going though with that procedure after you got something like that. You can't just apply the commonly accepted system to his. It's like trying to binary code in hexadecimal, throwing letters at my computer to see what he makes with them.
you mean x^x ≠ x+xsilmarilen wrote:
you're going completely wrong here, 2+2=/=2^2 and 1+1=/=1^2 so your whole calculation is useless.IntelliTroodon wrote:
so 2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798. If 1^2 is 11, then the same principle applies, making 1 equal to 11^(1/2), or 3.31662479036. If we add these two, we get 5.55269277036.
tl;dr 2 + 1 = 5.55269277036
because 2+2 kinda is the same as 2^2 and 1+1 also kinda is the same as 1^2
thats fine, but you got to that conclusion applying the standard system to his, which is not possible.IntelliTroodon wrote:
yes, 2=2.23606798, that was the entire point of the equations
well 2+2 happens to be the same as 2^2 in our normal field, but 1+1 is definitely not the same as 1^2Railey2 wrote:
you mean x^x ≠ x+xsilmarilen wrote:
you're going completely wrong here, 2+2=/=2^2 and 1+1=/=1^2 so your whole calculation is useless.
because 2+2 kinda is the same as 2^2 and 1+1 also kinda is the same as 1^2
also if 2^2=5 then 5^(1/2) would be 2 and not 2.2something.
oh lol 1+1 is 2
*sound of glass shattering*
if theres something like an arch-mistake, then I just made it.
you are guilty too though, with saying that 2+2 ≠ 2^2
:p
*sound of glass shattering*
if theres something like an arch-mistake, then I just made it.
you are guilty too though, with saying that 2+2 ≠ 2^2
:p
yeah true, i was thinking too much so i missed that obvious part 
ok, to make this clear,
this is our normal decimal system
this is OP's system
If 2+2=5 and 1+1=11 what's 2+1
"2+2=5" and "1+1=11" is absolutely not our normal decimal system, because
2+2≠5 and 1+1≠11
thats why I use the different color.
what you suggest, is
2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798 ... and so on.
This is not possible, its a mixup.
this is our normal decimal system
this is OP's system
If 2+2=5 and 1+1=11 what's 2+1
"2+2=5" and "1+1=11" is absolutely not our normal decimal system, because
2+2≠5 and 1+1≠11
thats why I use the different color.
what you suggest, is
2^2 is 5, 2=5^(1/2), which is 2.23606798 ... and so on.
This is not possible, its a mixup.
I feel your pain. This is why I will never be a good chess player, lol.silmarilen wrote:
yeah true, i was thinking too much so i missed that obvious part
Wtf is this shit?!!
@silmarilen, I thought of a better riddle, try to solve this:
4+4 = 7
4^4 = 7
4/4 = 3
3*3 = 3
3/3 = 3
3+3 = ?
4+4 = 7
4^4 = 7
4/4 = 3
3*3 = 3
3/3 = 3
3+3 = ?
x = 4Railey2 wrote:
4+4 = 7
4^4 = 7
4/4 = 3
3*3 = 3
3/3 = 3
3+3 = ?
y = 3
x+x = x^x = 7
x/x = y*y = y/y = 3
y+y = ?
y*y = y/y this logic suggests that * and / are one and the same operation
x+x = x^x also suggests that + and ^ are the same operations
x^x = 7, 7^0.25 = 1.6265765617
so x = 1.6265765617
the only way for 1.6265765617 to become 7 is 1.6265765617^4 and considering x+x = x^x the real identity of + is ^.
Now I'm gonna go by the ruling that when + or ^ is used the second operand becomes seperate from the value of x or y cus' fuck it.
e.g. the real expression for 4+4 = 7 is x^4 = 7 but for x/x = 3 it is still x/x.
Now:
x/x = y*y = y/y = 3
1.6265765617*1.6265765617 = 2.6457513111 but we can just round that to 3.
so / is actually *.
y*y = 3 is the same as y^2 = 3
3^0.5 = 1.7320508076
y = 1.7320508076
y+y = y^3
y^3 = 1.7320508076^3 = 5.1961524227
Since I appear to have made it a rule previously that all answers must be rounded to integers the answer must therefore be 5.
TLDR 3+3 = 5
3+3=4Railey2 wrote:
@silmarilen, I thought of a better riddle, try to solve this:
4+4 = 7
4^4 = 7
4/4 = 3
3*3 = 3
3/3 = 3
3+3 = ?
Fuck sake.
explanation:
3, 4 and 7 are actually numbers written in a different way. forget their actual meaning as you know it
now, +, ^. * and / still have their original meaning
so now look at it
4+4 and 4^4 have the same answer, that only happens with 2, so 4=2
3*3=3, 3/3=3 this only happens with 1, so 3=1
now 3+3 is actually 1+1, which is 2. and in our new system 4=2 so 1+1=2 becomes 3+3=4
3, 4 and 7 are actually numbers written in a different way. forget their actual meaning as you know it
now, +, ^. * and / still have their original meaning
so now look at it
4+4 and 4^4 have the same answer, that only happens with 2, so 4=2
3*3=3, 3/3=3 this only happens with 1, so 3=1
now 3+3 is actually 1+1, which is 2. and in our new system 4=2 so 1+1=2 becomes 3+3=4
yeah i realised after i made the post that 3/3=3 wasnt necessary to know the answer but i hadnt thought about them being there to rule out 0 yet.
theoretically, you could still find a different solution by treating the operators as the part that changed, but that sort of fails Occam's Razor. Or you just redefine everything and create something crazy.
But yes, the way you solved it was the way it was meant to be solved.
But yes, the way you solved it was the way it was meant to be solved.
occam's razor is love, occam's razor is life.
now that I think of it, the lazy way would be to redefine + as "equal to ^, yielding 7 as a result when used between 2 arbitrary numbers"
then define / as always yielding 3, and * as equal to /
the result of 3+3 is 7.
But thats kinda cheating, is it not?
or you just define ? as always being an orange cube. The only challenge would be not creating a contradiction.
then define / as always yielding 3, and * as equal to /
the result of 3+3 is 7.
But thats kinda cheating, is it not?
or you just define ? as always being an orange cube. The only challenge would be not creating a contradiction.