How To Proof 1+1=3

This video will show you how to proof 1+1=3. It is very simple way to proof it. Please help to subscribe @ Fruit Fresh Art
To watch more about how to Carving Fruit
===========================================
Este video le mostrará cómo probar 1 + 1 = 3. Es una manera muy simple de probarlo. Por favor, ayude a suscribirse @ Fruit Fresh Art
Para ver más sobre cómo tallar la fruta
=============================
Это видео покажет вам, как доказательство 1 + 1 = 3. Это очень простой способ доказательства. Пожалуйста, помогите подписаться @ Fruit Fresh Art
Для того, чтобы посмотреть больше о том, как высекая фрукты
=============================================
Dieses Video zeigt Ihnen, wie Beweis 1 + 1 = 3. Es ist sehr einfach, es zu beweisen. Bitte helfen Sie, @ Fruit Fresh Art abonnieren
Um mehr über das Carving Fruit zu sehen
===========================================
วิดีโอนี้จะแสดงวิธีการพิสูจน์ 1 + 1 = 3 มันเป็นวิธีที่ง่ายมากที่จะพิสูจน์มัน กรุณาช่วยในการจองซื้อ @ ผลไม้สดศิลปะ
หากต้องการดูเพิ่มเติมเกี่ยวกับวิธีการแกะสลักผลไม้

[belieberforever]

If you assume a=b, then (a-b) would = 0, and because you can‘t divide by 0, this calculation is incorrect.

[domtshi]

I don’t have enough brain cells for this vid

[crystalwolf]

a-b=0 since a number subtracted from itself is always 0

You can’t divide by 0
You tried to divide by 0
You’re wrong

[tristramdorr]

According to this logic I should be able to write “Milky Way” to all the answers on my next math test.

[ChimFilms]

Firstly, we now at the end just assumed a=1?

Secondly and mainly, let's follow this video along or go to 1:29 and replace all the values with 1, as it is assumed at the start. This will make it more clearer and will outline where it went wrong. (Each step will be simplified and multiplication and subtraction and stuff will already be done)

Assume
1 = 1

1. Multiply both sides by b
1 = 1

2. Subtract both sides by a²
1 - 1 = 1 - 1

3. Factorize both sides
0 = 0

4. Simplify both sides
1 = 2

what

[davidsu]

You can not simplify by dividing by 0(B-A)

[willambaltrett]

Depends on what kind of math you are doing and where you are assuming the placement of the start value "1".

[yayl]

The problem is not with division by 0, that is one problem, yes. However, the real problem is the assumption that A = 1 at the end. You can't do this cause at that point you are just giving A a made-up value which does not hold true for that equation. The sides are not equal when a is 1. That is because it should be:
A + 1 = 2A + 1
1-1 = A
A = 0
That is the only scenario when that equation holds true.

If 2 = 3 that means that all numbers are equal to another. This would mean that our understanding of math is flawed and so it is not possible to prove that math is wrong by using the rules of mathematics. It is only possible when you have made an error. Also, if 2=3 that would mean that formulas are unnecessary and not something which isn't to be used as they would be ineffective as all circles would be equal so you can just choose an area for a circle and be done. It is because of this that you can not prove that 2 = 3 cause that would break everything and therefore the way you got to that solution would be flawed as the rules that hold that solution to be true would be flawed. It would cause a ripple effect and everything crumbles.

[amitabhgulati]

This is wrong. If I say 4*(0)=7*(0) and I divide both sides by 0, Can i say 4=7, no because you can't divide by 0.

[letsgetlearning]

i told my teacher then she went to the headmaster

[klaudiaczarnecka]

Dividing by 0
My math teacher would be triggered

[dripdope]

"Assume" got me.
You could asume a = 8

[enriquebenedicto]

Issue is with step #4.

In order to go from:

[1] a(a-b) = (b-a)(b+a)

to

[2] a=a+b

You need to divide both sides of [1] with (a-b). But since a=b, a-b = 0. Always.

So you end up with:

[3] a * (a-b) / (a-b) = (b + a) * (a-b) / (a-b)

Which is the same as:
[4] a * 0/0 = 2a * 0/0

0/0 is mathematically indeterminate. All hell breaks lose once you reach that point.

A different way of seeing it is that equation [1] is really just 0 = 0. So no matter what multiplier you put in from of those 0's... you'll always get 0's. So I could write, at that point:

(a + b + z + d^2 - g^10 + SQRT(ff)) * 0 = 0 * (Sun diameter - Trump's IQ)

And it will still be 0=0

[thecoolerlink]

Why Is a Fruit Channel Doing Math?
:0

[reikonrebel]

There’s a lot of “assuming” going on in this. Assume that this whole equation makes no sense to begin with then subtract you got your head where the sun don’t shine= the answer still isn’t three.

[ipec]

thats not all simplified...
1+1 = 3
2 = 3

[someonelol]

"Simplify both sides" should be "divide calmly by *0*"

[RitsanniC]

Anything between 0.5 and 1.4 can be rounded to one. 1.4 + 1.4 = 2.8. If we round all the numbers we get 1+1=3

[yourgrandmashouse]

In mathematics it’s incorrect, but in nature 1+1=3x female+male=offspring (x as a placeholder for twins or beyond that) it’s not exactly correct for solving equations but it’s a different way to look at what numbers mean applied to organisms that breed.

[lyrajin]

when you simplify problem 3 (or problem 2 for that matter), you get the equation 0 = 0, therefore anything past step 3 is just objectively incorrect