DO YOU HAVE PROOF...THAT 1+1=2...OR JUST FAITH?
Based on the web sites below, I doubt that many have proof. Is this another example of how all knowledge begins with faith? Is it true that scientists must have faith that the universe is inherently orderly, even though there is no law or theorem that says it must be? Otherwise why waste their time?
...As a lover of Christ, science and mathematics I am quite used to faith AND reason.
(he then lists a couple of links to math and science blogs where people ask the same thing)
54 comments
Of course I do.
Math at its heart is a representation of reality.
If I have 1 item and I add another item, I have 2 items.
This has been shown to work any type of item, and since a number of other mathematical ideas are based on addition and they all work accurately, we can conclude logically that 1 + 1 is indeed 2 for all 1 = 1 and all 2 = 2, where + represents the addition of real numbers.
As for the universe being orderly, we have yet to find a phenomenon within the known universe that cannot somehow be defined. And those things that do not currently have lower-level explanations [Like how radioactive atoms decide whether to decay or not] are at least statistically understandable and can be modelled.
So, no, there is no faith in science, there are only observations, explanations, and conclusions.
FUCKER.
1 and 2 are invented by us to describe quantity and by their very definitions used in the numerical system we have created 1+1=2. In fact in the Roman's numerical system 1+1 would not equal 2. It would equal II, since II was used for 2. I suppose you could create a new numerical system where 1+1=3, but then that would only be true without the context of that numerical system and either 1 would be equivalent to our 1.5, 3 would be equivalent to our 2 or the 2 numbers could be equivalent to 2 entirely different numbers.
2 + 2 is ... ten?
IN BASE FOUR, I'M FINE.
there is a mathematical proof that 1+1=2. a relatively long and complicated proof,for such a basic concept, but proof. then there is the fact that 1 and 2 are concepts, and the concepts are defined, in part, by thta expression, so you could say it's true by definition.
Actually I have a great time in school (I am a librarian) proving to the children that 1+1 can equal 1, 2, or any number really. It just depends what it is you are trying to add up!
[I show them that one pile of books plus one pile of books equals one, larger, pile of books, etc.]
DO YOU HAVE PROOF...THAT 1+1=2...OR JUST FAITH?
If counting it out on your fingers doesn't convince you, maybe you should buy Principia Mathematica. The first few hundred pages are devoted to proving that 1+1=2.
Try using base 2. You can really blow your mind away.
Faith is the enemy of reason, by the way. Using one negates use of the other.
Actually it takes pretty much one year after the "bac" (high school gradation exam) in "maths spé" (mathematics special, the prep course for the most prestigious schools) to prove that 1+1=2.
Of course, we go the roundabout way : we have to define what a number is (starting from the void set), what an addition is, what the different kind of number are, what the Q, R, N, C sets of number are, how to go from one to another, etc, etc.
It was a fun year, though a bit geeky.
"Is it true that scientists must have faith that the universe is inherently orderly, even though there is no law or theorem that says it must be? Otherwise why waste their time?"
I honestly think this is a very good question. There is no such a law that states how everything in the universe is perfectly orderly according to certain principles (forces, causation etc.). However, due to scientific observation and repeatable tests we have FOUND certain laws that work 100% of the time. There are some aspects of our universe that can always be predicted.
Wait, is he saying that 1+1=/=2? Even my two year old understands that concept. There's no proof? And it's a logical fallacy to say that one loves christ AND science/math. Faith and reason are mutually opposed to each other, as well. And futhermore, you twit....oh wait, I just seen his handle. That explains it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but at the beginning of all human understanding, there is faith, in the sense that one decides to adhere to some axioms and work from them, isn't there?
colonel catastrophe said that using the peano postulates, 1+1=2 can be proven - so we still have to accept these postulates.
I won't try to argue that these postulates don't make a whole lot more sense than the postulate "There is a god, interfering in our lifes" or something similar, but they remain postulates we accept for convenience - we can't give a logical reason for accepting them. If I don't err, it's an instance of the Münchhausen Trilemma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_Trilemma ).
Here is the proof: first, you define the natural numbers as follows. You start with the empty set, which you define to be zero. Then you consider the set containing the empty set, you define this to be 1, the set containing the set containing the empty set is 2, etc... More generally, the operation of constructing the set containing the previous set you constructed, you will call that the operation of constructing the follower.
So, defining zero, and defining his followers, you can construct the natural numbers. Now, all we need to do is define addition. Actually, when we construct a follower, what we do is adding 1 by definition. So, there you have it, by definition, 1+1=2 . And there even wasn't any proof needed. It's just part of the basic construction of what it is to be a natural number and what it means to add numbers.
@Michael:
Actually, there are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand ternary, those that don't, and those that mistake it for binary.
1+1 doesn't equal 2 as a matter of definition, would it?
That would be slightly too easy wouldn't it?
"Joel has one sweet. Sarah also has one sweet.
If both Joel and Sarah put their sweets in a bowl, how many sweets will be in the bowl?"
Are you just grouchy because you lost a mark on this question in an exam?
No your right 1+1=CHAIR
xtian logic
Of course I do.
Math at its heart is a representation of reality.
If I have 1 item and I add another item, I have 2 items.
Not so. Math is, at its heart, purely abstract, though it has analogies to the "real" world. Your third sentence is not a proof, but rather nothing more than a restatement of the claim. In fact, the symbolic proof for 1+1=2 is extremely long and complex. You can find it in Principia Mathematica by Russell and Whitehead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Principia_Mathematica_theorem_54-43.png
Just sayin'
1+1=2 can be demonstrated visually.
I have one stick: |
And my friend has another stick: |
We put our sticks together: ||
Now, would you say that, together, we have "a stick and another stick" or would you say we have "two sticks"
To anyone who happens to know more about this than me: I know it's simple, I'm not a mathematician. Try not to hate me too much.
The economy, engineering, art, science, everything in fact, are based on the understanding that 1+1=2. If it isn't then we are royally fucked.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.