2 + 2 doesn't = 4? An original proof created by myself.

[aston70]

So if 2+2<>4, what does it = ? Anything?

[The_Stache]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Now answer this.

If you are driving at the speed of light and turn your headlights on, What happens?

Hrm.... how close is the nearest singularity? That will effect the result.

[DGthe3]

1) you cannot add things unless they have the same unit. A null unit is still a unit. Therefore, 2+2=4 because all are of the same null unit

2) The speed of light is a constant. an object moving towards you emiting white light will appear to emit blueish light. Similarly if it moves away it emits red light. Using this principal we have mapped out the relative position of stars and galaxies and figured out that the universe is expanding in all directions with no central point. Consequently both you and I are at the center of the universe at this very moment.

Originally Posted by aston70

and you would divide by zero which is neither a number nor a unit, and we all know what happens when you divide by zero... lol

for those that don't know: the universe implodes

[Mr. Wyndham]

2+2=4...

If the numbers are just measures of units and have no properties, then they must have an associated unit. If they don't, then they cannot be a measure of anything; which means the definition of the numbers is false; which means that which you wrote does not exist. So those numbers must have a a 'default', universal unit that allows them to exist or else your proof that 2+2<>4is invalid because it is grounded in a false truth that the numbers are indeed a measure of something.

The only constant unit(by your definition) is distance. Inches, feet, yards, milimeters, or nanometers; the numbers are implied to be a measure of distance unless another unit is otherwise specified.

Therefore 2 + 2 = 4.


Wow...I needed this. Talk about a brain excercise...

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by aston70

theory != fact

Otherwise i'd be a fact that we all came from primordial soup. And we all know that Al Gore created everything.

Dang... you mean Al Gore invented Math too??? No wonder 2+2 does not equal 4
Man My brain is hurting, I need A nice drive on some mountian roads to clear my head. See ya !!!

[09'Z28]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Man My brain is hurting

i know i opened this thread way to early in the morning

[aston70]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Dang... you mean Al Gore invented Math too??? No wonder 2+2 does not equal 4

It's a theory... It was his invention that which preceeded all things... I was under the impression this thread was a joke, so I hope no one takes me too seriously.

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Man My brain is hurting, I need A nice drive on some mountian roads to clear my head. See ya !!!

East TN I presume? I'd like to head down to Fontana Dam if you know what I mean.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by aston70

It's a theory... It was his invention that which preceeded all things... I was under the impression this thread was a joke, so I hope no one takes me too seriously.



East TN I presume? I'd like to head down to Fontana Dam if you know what I mean.

You must mean down to the Tail of the Dragon... If you do look out, The Highway Patrol has really cracked down on speeding.
http://www.tailofthedragon.com/

[aston70]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

You must mean down to the Tail of the Dragon... If you do look out, The Highway Patrol has really cracked down on speeding.
http://www.tailofthedragon.com/

Yeah, that's what I meant.

[Mindz]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

2+2=4...

If the numbers are just measures of units and have no properties, then they must have an associated unit. If they don't, then they cannot be a measure of anything; which means the definition of the numbers is false; which means that which you wrote does not exist. So those numbers must have a a 'default', universal unit that allows them to exist or else your proof that 2+2<>4is invalid because it is grounded in a false truth that the numbers are indeed a measure of something.

The only constant unit(by your definition) is distance. Inches, feet, yards, milimeters, or nanometers; the numbers are implied to be a measure of distance unless another unit is otherwise specified.

Therefore 2 + 2 = 4.


Wow...I needed this. Talk about a brain excercise...

Best response I've seen yet, but not completely correct. Since the unit is implied, it is still connected to the number. As I have stated before, to correctly write the formula, you must include units after the 2's. The shorthand is commonly known at 2 + 2 = 4, but the written statement is false.

Also, BTW. Something I just realized and wanted to ask. Why would anyone want to add 2 + 2 in the first place if there's no specified units?

[Zieke]

sorry, im going to go off topic a bit.

Mindz, you should call the director of the new Batman movies, and see if they're doing the Riddler in the next movie. you could be the actor?

[Mindz]

I don't think I have the facial expression to pull a heath ledger over Jim Carrey. Otherwise, I might actually have a chance...


"Riddle me this... Riddle me that.... What's afraid of the big


black


*BOOOOOOOOOOMMM*




Bat..."

[bcannan354]

You have got to be kidding me????????

[The_Stache]

Ok if I have this strait..

(2=2) is a correct statment right? We are assuming that they are just symbols without actual units right? OK I'll bite.

(2 + 2 = 4) =/= to a correct statement because without units to give the numbers(symbolics) substance you can't have 4. So lets prove this.

since 2(and 4 respectively) really equals 0 (a representative symbol of absence) we can say..

0 + 0 = 0

Ok lets add units, because you can neither create nor destroy matter (physics 101), and if this proof is correct your answer should be the same as the original equation with units.

0 camaro's + 0 camaro's = 0 camaro's
2 camaro's + 2 camaro's = 4 camaro's

Seems like the proof doesn't meet since 4 units of camaro's doesnt match 0 units of camaro's