## 2=1!

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

bahman
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

### 2=1!

I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
Skepdick
Posts: 8042
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: 2=1!

bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
1/0 is undefined, not infinity.

Your brain probably did a lim x → 0 (1/x) and you arrived at infinity, but the limit only exists if x → 0- (approaching from the left) or x → 0+ (approaching from right) not both.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lim+x-%3E0+1%2Fx
bahman
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

### Re: 2=1!

Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:14 am
bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
1/0 is undefined, not infinity.
So the first derivative also undefined. Please note that the first derivative is defined as the limit df(x)/dx when dx → 0. I am however interested in the exact value rather than the limit value.
Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:14 am Your brain probably did a lim x → 0 (1/x) and you arrived at infinity, but the limit only exists if x → 0- (approaching from the left) or x → 0+ (approaching from right) not both.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lim+x-%3E0+1%2Fx
But lim x → 0+ (1/x) can never be -infinity since x is a nonzero value.
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4220
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

### Re: 2=1!

bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?
Nothing a good psychiatrist can't tackle if you have a few decades.
bahman
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

### Re: 2=1!

Terrapin Station wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?
Nothing a good psychiatrist can't tackle if you have a few decades.
What is wrong with OP?
alan1000
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:03 am

### Re: 2=1!

[/quote]
1/0 is undefined, not infinity.
[/quote]

According to my limited understanding, It is undefined in classical arithmetic, but not necessarily in the context of number theory, if "0" is understood as Robinson's "h" - in which case 1/0 does equal infinity?
Skepdick
Posts: 8042
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: 2=1!

alan1000 wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:32 pm According to my limited understanding, It is undefined in classical arithmetic, but not necessarily in the context of number theory, if "0" is understood as Robinson's "h" - in which case 1/0 does equal infinity?
This is just a trivial consequence of Quine's "Holding true what come may". (ref: confirmation holism and the Quine-Dunheim thesis).

Take any symbolic expression and assume it to be a theorem of the system. That is, assume the expression evaluates to "true". Then proceed to craft (butcher?) the semantics of the system/symbols in such a way so as to always protect the theorem. If you so choose to make N + 1 = N a theorem, then you shall find a solution to that equation. The solution is ∞.

Another example is that you take the negation of the LNC as a theorem (which blows up all of Logic). So what? Now we have a system in which P and not-P is true. Some people would tell you that such system is "inconsistent". OK - it's inconsistent. But it exists and executes just fine on my computer. lnc.png (6.83 KiB) Viewed 1077 times
nothing
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

### Re: 2=1!

bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
(1/x)*x ≠ 1 if/when x = 0
(1/x)*x = 0 if/when x = 0

We can not set x = 0 in the equality such to equate (1/0) = inf. as the latter equality is false. Follows: 2 ≠ 1.

The ratio 1/0 is "undefined" in ordinary mathematics & fallaciously places "something" (ie. 1) on (a base of) "nothing" (ie. 0).
Similar to the query "how can something come from nothing?", it begs the question "how can something be on nothing?"
Such a ratio has no practical meaning in the real, physical universe - (usage of) any such ratio is thus explicitly user-defined.
bahman
Posts: 5009
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

### Re: 2=1!

nothing wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:54 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
(1/x)*x ≠ 1 if/when x = 0
(1/x)*x = 0 if/when x = 0

We can not set x = 0 in the equality such to equate (1/0) = inf. as the latter equality is false. Follows: 2 ≠ 1.

The ratio 1/0 is "undefined" in ordinary mathematics & fallaciously places "something" (ie. 1) on (a base of) "nothing" (ie. 0).
Similar to the query "how can something come from nothing?", it begs the question "how can something be on nothing?"
Such a ratio has no practical meaning in the real, physical universe - (usage of) any such ratio is thus explicitly user-defined.
I think we should define different zero as we define different infinity. The problem solved.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2152
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

### Re: 2=1!

bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:28 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 4:26 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?
Nothing a good psychiatrist can't tackle if you have a few decades.
What is wrong with OP?
The actual statement (1/x)*x = 1 means that x can be anything but...
Division by zero is not defined and is implicitly understood. The full explicit statement is...

(1/x)*x = 1, x is Real and x ≠ 0

It is a convention to skip the exclusionary statements when common to save clutter in easy algebraic expressions when the context is understood. All text books that are appropriately correct tell you this near the beginning of such courses. It is also repeated in other math texts, often as a summary at the very least.

You used 'derivative' colloquially and not to mean Calculus limits here. If you are expecting to extend meaning to division by zero, limits are used to express this but even there it only means that you can get as close to zero as possible but never equal zero. You CAN devise your own system if you'd like but require clear specification of what anything divided by zero means and in a way that is non-contradictory. Calculus suffices though. If you'd like a reason to understand mathematical "Limits" that define the 'derivatives', I CAN give you an example. Hint: Draw a square of ANY unit size and ask how you could represent this size using ONLY a line.

(1/x)*(x+x) = 2 is a valid sentence to mean that x = 2 ONLY. That is, you cannot force x = 0.
nothing
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

### Re: 2=1!

bahman wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 8:00 pm I think we should define different zero as we define different infinity. The problem solved.
The problem one will encounter if/when doing this is they will no longer be describing anything in the real, physical universe.
That is fine if the purposes for doing the same are for another system, but it would have 0 application to reality/physics.

There is no such thing as "infinity" in the real, physical universe. It is a concept/construct concocted by humans thus begins/ends there (ie. is finite).
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 7089
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: 2=1!

nothing wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 1:49 am
bahman wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 8:00 pm I think we should define different zero as we define different infinity. The problem solved.
The problem one will encounter if/when doing this is they will no longer be describing anything in the real, physical universe.
That is fine if the purposes for doing the same are for another system, but it would have 0 application to reality/physics.

There is no such thing as "infinity" in the real, physical universe. It is a concept/construct concocted by humans thus begins/ends there (ie. is finite).
The continual change of the physical necessitates infinity as proven through the physical.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 7089
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: 2=1!

nothing wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:54 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:00 am I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0. This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero noting that 0+0=0. we have (infinity)*(0+0)=infinity*0=1. So 2=1!

What is wrong?

Resolving this problem is necessary otherwise one cannot evaluate the first derivative.
(1/x)*x ≠ 1 if/when x = 0
(1/x)*x = 0 if/when x = 0

We can not set x = 0 in the equality such to equate (1/0) = inf. as the latter equality is false. Follows: 2 ≠ 1.

The ratio 1/0 is "undefined" in ordinary mathematics & fallaciously places "something" (ie. 1) on (a base of) "nothing" (ie. 0).
Similar to the query "how can something come from nothing?", it begs the question "how can something be on nothing?"
Such a ratio has no practical meaning in the real, physical universe - (usage of) any such ratio is thus explicitly user-defined.
1 line divided by a zero dimensional point results in two lines. 0 is a process of halving thus an manifestation of multiplicity of parts.
nothing
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

### Re: 2=1!

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 9:14 pm 1 line divided by a zero dimensional point results in two lines. 0 is a process of halving thus an manifestation of multiplicity of parts.
In reality, there is no such thing as a "point", let alone a "zero dimensional point".
Mathematicians use "points" as devices because they are useful for solving mathematical problems.
Dividing a line (l) in two is mathematically expressed as fixing a base of 2 viz. l/2.
One need not any zero dimensional "point" to do this.

0 is not a process of halving - such a suggestion is absurd.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 7089
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: 2=1!

nothing wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 10:14 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 9:14 pm 1 line divided by a zero dimensional point results in two lines. 0 is a process of halving thus an manifestation of multiplicity of parts.
In reality, there is no such thing as a "point", let alone a "zero dimensional point".
Mathematicians use "points" as devices because they are useful for solving mathematical problems.
Dividing a line (l) in two is mathematically expressed as fixing a base of 2 viz. l/2.
One need not any zero dimensional "point" to do this.

0 is not a process of halving - such a suggestion is absurd.
A point is nothing and as nothing is the gap between phenomena. Phenomenon move through nothingness.

All mathematics are a description of reality and as descriptions necessitate them as having been grounded in some phenomenon.

Dividing a line between two points results in another line between two points. The point exists as the divisor.