From: Lyndon Nerenberg Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: "Three Theory" Usenet Posting Date: 04 Sep 2003 14:54:04 -0600 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <86ad9kgtqr.fsf@gandalf.orthanc.ab.ca> Sender: lyndon@gandalf.orthanc.ab.ca User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 8 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:150431 Does anyone remember the 'three theory' usenet post[1], circa 1988? I've searched everywhere I can think of trying to find a copy, with no success. Did any of you happen to save a copy of this gem? --lyndon [1] This was the proof that '1+1 == 3 for sufficiently large values of 1'. Probably not original, but a howler none-the-less. ###### From: Marco S Hyman Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Three Theory" Usenet Posting Date: 04 Sep 2003 20:20:13 -0700 Organization: S.N.A.F.U. -- http://www.snafu.org/ Lines: 19 Sender: marc@blackie.wireless.snafu.org Message-ID: References: <86ad9kgtqr.fsf@gandalf.orthanc.ab.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: dumbcat.snafu.org (208.201.244.209) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1062735424 17384775 208.201.244.209 (16 [97260]) X-Orig-Path: dumbcat.snafu.org!news User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dumbcat.snafu.ORG!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:150481 Lyndon Nerenberg writes: > [1] This was the proof that '1+1 == 3 for sufficiently large values of > 1'. Probably not original, but a howler none-the-less. No, but I've got a version of 1 == 2: Begin with: b = a Multiply by "a": ab = a**2 Subtract "b**2": (ab - b**2) = (a**2 - b**2) Factor: b (a - b) = (a - b) (a + b) Divide by (a - b): b = (a + b) Substitute "a" for "b": a = (a + a) Simplify: a = 2a Divide by "a": 1 = 2 which I may have even cribbed from this group sometime in the past. // marc ###### From: stanb45@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Three Theory" Usenet Posting References: <86ad9kgtqr.fsf@gandalf.orthanc.ab.ca> Organization: Metropolis Grafix Reply-To: stanb45@dial.pipex.com Message-ID: X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.5.2 UNIX) Date: 05 Sep 2003 17:30:34 GMT Lines: 38 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62-241-188-176.dsl.pipex.com X-Trace: 1062783034 news.dial.pipex.com 259 62.241.188.176 X-Complaints-To: abuse@uk.uu.net Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!lnewsoutpeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewsinpeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewspost00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:150375 On 04 Sep 2003 20:20:13 -0700, Marco S Hyman wrote: >Lyndon Nerenberg writes: > >> [1] This was the proof that '1+1 == 3 for sufficiently large values of >> 1'. Probably not original, but a howler none-the-less. > >No, but I've got a version of 1 == 2: > > Begin with: b = a > Multiply by "a": ab = a**2 > Subtract "b**2": (ab - b**2) = (a**2 - b**2) > Factor: b (a - b) = (a - b) (a + b) > Divide by (a - b): b = (a + b) > Substitute "a" for "b": a = (a + a) > Simplify: a = 2a > Divide by "a": 1 = 2 > >which I may have even cribbed from this group sometime in the past. I have the following version cribbed from a mathematics book. Consider the following statement: x = y Now multiply both sides by x, giving: x^2 = xy Then add x^2 - 2xy to each side: x^2 + x^2 - 2xy = xy + x^2 - 2xy This can be simplified to: 2(x^2 - xy) = x^2 - xy Dividing both sides by x^2 - xy we get: 2 = 1 The problem with both examples is the division by zero, of course :-) -- Cheers, Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com (Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.) The future was never like this! ###### From: "RobH" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Three Theory" Usenet Posting Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 22:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Organization: NOYDB Lines: 47 Message-ID: References: <86ad9kgtqr.fsf@gandalf.orthanc.ab.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: host81-128-195-234.in-addr.btopenworld.com X-Trace: hercules.btinternet.com 1062886370 3813 81.128.195.234 (6 Sep 2003 22:12:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-complaints@lists.btinternet.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 22:12:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!carbon.eu.sun.com!btnet-feed5!btnet!news.btopenworld.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:150529 "Stan Barr" wrote in message news:slrnblghkj.960.stanb45@citadel.metropolis.local... > On 04 Sep 2003 20:20:13 -0700, Marco S Hyman wrote: > >Lyndon Nerenberg writes: > > > >> [1] This was the proof that '1+1 == 3 for sufficiently large values of > >> 1'. Probably not original, but a howler none-the-less. > > > >No, but I've got a version of 1 == 2: > > > > Begin with: b = a > > Multiply by "a": ab = a**2 > > Subtract "b**2": (ab - b**2) = (a**2 - b**2) > > Factor: b (a - b) = (a - b) (a + b) > > Divide by (a - b): b = (a + b) > > Substitute "a" for "b": a = (a + a) > > Simplify: a = 2a > > Divide by "a": 1 = 2 > > > >which I may have even cribbed from this group sometime in the past. > > I have the following version cribbed from a mathematics book. > > Consider the following statement: x = y > > Now multiply both sides by x, giving: x^2 = xy > > Then add x^2 - 2xy to each side: x^2 + x^2 - 2xy = xy + x^2 - 2xy > > This can be simplified to: 2(x^2 - xy) = x^2 - xy > > Dividing both sides by x^2 - xy we get: 2 = 1 > > The problem with both examples is the division by zero, of course :-) > No problem with the divide by zero. How do you think God creates black holes? -- RobH The future's dim, the future's mono.