definitely 8
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
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
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
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
x = 4Railey2 wrote:
4+4 = 7
4^4 = 7
4/4 = 3
3*3 = 3
3/3 = 3
3+3 = ?
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 = ?
This is fun, why notAurani wrote:
Did you seriously take this seriously?Brian OA wrote:
8
I was expecting you to reply "Did you literally take me literally?"Brian OA wrote:
This is fun, why notAurani wrote:
Did you seriously take this seriously?
I miss mathexpertAutoMedic wrote:
Meth is boring
show your answer thenRailey2 wrote:
again mixing 2 systems. Not how it works. You assume that the numbers on the left side are encoded while the one on the right side of the equation are not.
oh sorry i didnt see your post and thanks chaee for agreeingRailey2 wrote:
but I already did. It's not solvable unless you mix 2 systems, which is not how its done. We miss the link between 2 and 1, in every case.
The 2 equations can be translated to
a + a = b
x + x = y
a + x = ?
theres no way. All your solutions rely on conveniently mixing systems up in one way or another, instead of actually attempting to solve for the variables within the given system.