[Nestorian]

Well, this is my question how is it possible for 1+1 to =3?


I have pondered over this again and again, and then finnally it came to me. Something so simple but nonetheless true. I'm sure others will disagree with me, but that is a matter of opinion, not fact.

Here is what I've come up with...


1MUM + 1DAD= 1Baby +1MUM + 1DAD Thus: 1+1=3 tell me what you want but factually it works. You put 2 people together and you can come out with 3. Hummm, I wonder what kind of arguments people will have against my theory?

Well, I welcome any enlightenment, or comments (good /bad) or even suggestions, or other ideas. I'm no math wiz kid, but I'm pretty sure that what I've stated counts for something.

Peace to all brothers and sisters.

[Stratmando]

Here's one for you, 1 + 1 = 4?









Twins.
You're right.

[Nestorian]

Here's one for you, 1 + 1 = 4?









Twins.
You're right.

D'OH, I pushed enter.

I was going to say, all through school they say 1+1=2, but they must not have considered, reproduction of our race, or cells (1=2 eh?), or other critters like turtles, insects (1 or 2= 10000000) Crazy eh?

Everything is about relativity. But I like how you think! :D;):p

[Synnen]

or how about this, if you're bringing biology into it:

1+1 = 1







Yup... one sperm plus one egg equals one baby.

[Capuchin]

... this isn't maths.

[Nestorian]

...this isn't maths.

No, how is it not math? It isn't really logical.

1+1=1*2, or 1+1=3-1 and so on. Difference in expressions, 1+1=3 is a differnce in relevance.

You would not use Pie r2 to solve for the area of a rectangle, would you? So, in the case of 1mum and 1dad coming togther can result in 1baby + 1mum + 1dad.

Please do let me know how this is not math. If it's not math, then what is it? I'd like to know what I'm referring to so I can correct and research on it further.

Thanks for the opposite opinion, but please give me something to go from. Proof, or facts.

Peace be with you Capuchin.

[Clough]

Hi, Nestorian!

I think that it's just a different way of looking at math and greatly depends on what someone says that "1" represents.

So, a definition as to that which "1" represents is something that needs to be defined and determined in order to answer these sort of math problems.

Thanks!

[Capuchin]

I think this is more suited to a chemistry context where we can say

1MUM + 1DAD -->some process (sex), ingestion, time--> 1Baby + 1Mum + 1Dad

If you want to pretend it's mathematical, then you can only say that baby must = 0.

[juhi2011]

1+1=3/4/5... if one has got twins or triplets or even quadraples

[Nestorian]

Great answers all around. Now I need to define and ponder the meaning and use of "math".

Thanks to every one for replying.

Peace and kindness.

[ebaines]

This discussion reminds me of that old joke about how single-cell organisms like amoebas are the smartest creatures on earth, because only they can multiply by dividing!

[I think I hear a collective groan]

[harum]

Unfortunately, what you have said counts for nothing. Neither has it anything to do with math. If you want to prove a math statement you have to stick to the math methods; in this case - to axioms and theorems of the number theory. Your "conclusion" therefore is of no interest to mathematicians for sure. Besides, your particular equation is wrong. It should be 23+23=46. 23 chromosomes from mother and 23 chromosomes from father equals 46 chromosomes in a baby. 23*2 + 23*2 = 2*46 - for twins. Try to disprove my logic here! From physics point of view (in case you turn your eyes to physics), your "logic" is also wrong, because your system (mom and dad) is not closed, i.e. there is an exchange of energy and matter with the environment, meaning all bets are off :). To summarize, you probably confuse yourself with a semantic trick: understanding that it takes mom (1) and dad (1) to give birth to a baby (1) or many babies does not mean that you have to sum them all up before and after and then say the numbers are equal. Hope this helps, h.

[sarnian]

Now i need to define and ponder the meaning and use of "math".

What "math" in this topic ? The topic is called "A trick math equation". Trick is linked to "joke". Good topic name!

[harum]

Nestorian agrees: I agree you are right. Still, I know that when two people come together, there can be any number of out comes, so what kind of question it that? Philosophy?

What question? If you try to word it, I will try to guess who can answer it.

[Nestorian]

What question? If you try to word it, I will try to guess who can answer it.

The question what kind of disapline would the equation fit under, 1+1=3. I know that the rules of mathmatics do not apply and maybe I'm cracked. But A person is capable of seeing things in different ways, and interpreting those by the means they see fit, or rather reason to fit. I'm thinking that's a Philosophical thing.

If truth be told, the equation I wrote, needs more information to make it any thing but a simple expression of one's perception of a given event, situation.

Can we break it down, to make sense, and fit? I realise this may sound absolutely dumb and a wast of time, but what if it could be of value. Can we find a way to make it systematicaly sifnigicant?

I'll have to read some books but I'm thinking it's a very mesy business.

Thanks for your sincierity.

Peace and kindness.

[harum]

The question what kind of disapline would the equation fit under, 1+1=3. I know that the rules of mathmatics do not apply and maybe I'm cracked. But A person is capable of seeing things in different ways, and interpreting those by the means they see fit, or rather reason to fit. I'm thinking that's a Philosophical thing.

There are things that are just not a matter of interpretation. As a matter of fact, almost nothing in math, science, philosophy is up for interpretation. There is a formal proof that 1+1=2, which uses a set of axioms and is based on many theorems of the number theory. You have no idea how many people and how many generations of mathematicians sacrificed/dedicated their lives and lost their minds getting mathematics and its language to where it is today. It would be so naïve to hijack a random statement and "re-interpret" it.

[Nestorian]

There are things that are just not a matter of interpretation. As a matter of fact, almost nothing in math, science, philosophy is up for interpretation. There is a formal proof that 1+1=2, which uses a set of axioms and is based on many theorems of the number theory. You have no idea how many people and how many generations of mathematicians sacrificed/dedicated their lives and lost their minds getting mathematics and its language to where it is today. It would be so naive to hijack a random statement and "re-interpret" it.

That is true, and I may not know them, but I do respect them. However, I don't think math can explain, in a logical way, How a person loves another, or why some one hates another. There has to be a bridge, and this equation may be a start to that, but we'd never probably see it. Some one else generations later may.

Those things exist and math can not explain them, except if you bring in neuro chemical equations and how different elements/chemicals react with biological components/ beings. But even then, that's a Psychological thing, and biochemistry, not math. We need to be able to apply the nessessary tools to the nessessary situation. "Everything in it's place."-Unknown.

Im not 100% sure what the theory of relativity is, but I imagine it must apply to this in some way. I suppose I could look there eh? But it doesn't apply to math does it?

Any way thanks.

Peace be with you.

[Wiley50]

It is the same as if you take 2 apples from 3 apples what do you have? 2 apples, there is 1 apple left, but you have 2 apples in your hand.

[InfoJunkie4Life]

You want it to work...

1 + 1 = 3 in a base nine system that excludes 2.

3 is just representative of 2 in the same way we can shift all the letters in the codes we used as a kid (1 = a, 2 =b, etc).

But it works.

Lets not get all caught up in semantics, it was a nice little humor to read.

[bates0429]

well 1+1 in binary 11 = 3