Solve.
Princeton mathematicians spent 2 months on this problem to determine its correct answer.
Can you figure it out?
y = infinity
Y = infinity
y - y = 1
0 = 1
Easy
>>702062745
>>702062786
Infinity isn't a REAL number. It's just a concept.
>>702062883
>0 = 1
are you retarded
>>702062786
>>702062745
>>702062574
there is no solution. it's not possible.
>>702062574
If we only count real numbers, this isn't an equation, and therefore this isn't solvable (the idea with EQUAtions is that both sides are EQUAL)
When did facebook spill onto 4chan
>>702063023
what if y represents such a formula that allows its value + 1 to equal itself?
I feel like it's possible
>>702063023
being a samefag
This is just a false statement, nothing to solve
This is literally irrational
>>702063132
I'll bite, like what?
Worked on that for two months. When?
>>702062954
Unfortunately, it is considered okay to use it as a number. Field winners use it in equations. Math has become a joke, worse than theoretical physics.
It's X because the next letter is Y. What do I win?
>>702063132
That would be infinity, because if y=y+1 then y=y+2 then y=y+3 and so on.
>>702063132
>>702063257
Multiplicative inverse.
>>702063132
Y can only be one number though, that's the point of variables
>>702063257
I'm not an expert, but maybe something like:
f(y) = y - 1 IF y > 0
So if y = 2, y - 1, then 1 = 2 - 1 + 1
im probably wrong though
>>702063000
Trips have spoken.
>>702063512
typo, meant to say 2 = 2 - 1 + 1
it is either positive infinity or negative infinity, it could be either one. Since the value of infinity is forever going, adding one does not effect it in the slightest. So therefore the only possible answer to this problem is y= +/- ∞.
>>702063488
a number or an expression, but I get what you're saying, can't replace it with f(something) unless something is the same for both sides
>>702062574
You're writing that inequality wrong, it's supposed to be y < y + 1
Hijacking this thread, with no survivors!
>>702062574
The answer is
y = y + 1
Nice division by zero fgt
y=y+1
y(1-1)=1
y=1/0
>>702062574
it's just a way of adding 1 to a number
use y++ for cleaner code
>>702063713
That equation literally solves itself
>>702063291
Well it's a good thing we have people like you to set the record straight and fix math, Mr. 8th grader!
>>702062574
Y= infinity
>>702062883
Thats wrong on so many levels you fuck.
How in the world can 0=1
That's like saying have 0 grams is the same as having 1
>>702064003
>>702063772
>>702062987
Obvious joke dipshit top kek
>>702063837
>9
Dat BE-DM-AS
>>702063772
Easy
>>702063912
he should wait, then shoot the survivor as many times as he can
the other two will shoot each other, banking on the fact that white will probably miss and the most dangerous person is the other
>>702064414
those arent lines. lines are straight
>>702063837
Nine?
>>702064232
36 cm^2
>>702063912
He should try to shoot himself
>>702064504
About as straight as your faggot ass
>>702064682
>>702064003
Assuming the boy/girl birth rate is 50/50, yes
>>702062574
Increment y;
>>702064682
fuckin roasted
>>702064199
it's been proven that numbers beyond Aleph Null can get large enough that math contradicts itself. Y could be such a number.
read up on it
you people are all retards.
op, take this shit back to facebook.
>>702065016
Vsauce did a video on it
>>702064682
damn son.jpeg
>>702063834
We have a winner.
This is exactly why division by zero is forbidden: because it allows you to prove that all numbers are equal to each other.
>>702064232
36cm squared
>>702064003
No his plan would work if they killed the babies that are boys lol
>>702062574
Looks like an incremental assignment in code to me. Loop that nigger and setup the comprison inside function scope.
I think read about a guy that had solved it. He use another equation do not remember the name. But it is just an aproximation.
>>702065024
>>702065024
>>702065024
is this thing on?
op said solve, not solve for y. this is solution.
>>702065331
360 nope scope.
>>702062574
Poop
>>702062574
y=y+1
y-1=y
Y = Perpetual Motion
>>702065331
>asking a question about equality with floating point numbers
assuming that Y = Y+1, naturally Y would be equal to Y+1
simple maths, bros. try harder.
y =/= y+n (n є ℝ and n =/= 0)
>>702062574
It's an imaginary number, I think.
>>702065167
What no you can't divide by 0 because let's think of a pizza for example;
How would you divide a whole pizza into 0 pieces?
>>702062574
Anyone who treats this statement as anything other than nonsense is either under-aged or a slack-jawed simpleton that can barely wipe his own ass. Don't believe me? Pic related. This isn't up for debate, so don't even try.
>>702065016
You're right sir.
Infinite cardinal numbers.
>>702063401
Lol it would still be y+1 y would just continuously 1 larger.
why the fuck are you dipshits still trying
>>702063834
heres your answer
>>702065568
That doesn't solve y
You paradoxed the equation
>>702065769
eat it before anyone has a chance to look at it
>>702065568
Maybe when you're programming. But even then, you need to define what is Y before assign that variable to itself + 1.
>>702065936
this
6/2(1+2)= 1
>>702065769
Sit down and have another toke
>>702064003
Starting off, half of the families roll boys and half roll girls, and the boy families stop. The gender ratio is 50/50
Of the remaining families, half roll boys and half roll girls again. The gender ratio never changes.
In fact, even if a family drops out, the remaining pool of families is still governed by the 50/50 ratio.
>>702065936
Schrodinger's pizza
>>702066056
you forgot to add 1 to the other side bro
>>702064682
oh he got slept
2(1+2)
2(3)
2x3
6 / above stuffs
6/2(1+2)= 1
=1, i win
and the other answer to OP q is... y = infinity
>>702066460
stahp b8in' pls
>>702063291
>implying theoretical physics wasn't already math to begin with
>>702062574
y=1,
boolean algebra you silly gooses; nobody specified elementary algebra
easy
y=y+1
y=absolute value of the sum of the set [-1,0]
and so y=1
and y+1, which is absolute value of [0,1], is 1.
>>702062574
You can set each side of the equation equal to z and graph. The solution is always when the lines intersect. Hence these are parallel lines, they never intersect so no solution exist. QED.
>>702063772
Thats a more complicated form of the utility problem. not solvable.
>>702066851
Woah woah woah nigger. Graphs aren't math. They're a pretty way to visualize math, but they sure as shit don't prove anything.
>>702063912
Duck.
>>702063291
Math bro here, you're a faggot. A faggot who is wrong.
>>702063772
C seems to think this
>>702066843
also, to add (no pun intended)
'adding 1' here is defined as adding 1 to every element of the set in y
>>702063837
>>702064400
>>702064586
It's one, fucktards. Order of operations.
>>702067315
this is fucking gold
anon got assblasted right there
>>702062954
>number
>real
pick one
>>702067456
jesus christ go back to 4th grade
>>702067333
Looks right. You are loading uninitialized integers into themselves basically. I'd imagine you need to turn off warnings/errors for that to compile?
>>702062883
> 0 = 1
>>702067235
Ikr what a retard
The answer is obviously y=√(-1)
>>702067617
Nope you can just gcc it
>>702064232
could be anything wtf please explain
It can't be a natural number, as follows.
￢ 0 = S (0), since zero is not the successor of any natural number.
S n = S (S n) → n = S n, since the successor function is injective
￢ n = S n → ￢ S n = S (S n), the contrapositive of the previous line
then by induction,
∀n ￢ n = S n
>>702067019
Oh sure it is. See... Solving this equation algebraically and graphically yields the same results. Graphically the answer is where the to lines intersect.
>>702062574
You are the worst.
>>702067617
-Wall shows the error though
y = y + 1
0 = 1
zero and one. True and false. On and off.
It's there, but is not there to the same time.
Like quantum physics.
>Solved (?
>>702063000
>>702063488
>>702063699
>>702064199
>>702064400
>>702064599
>>702065422
>>702065799
>>702066000
>>702066177
>>702067022
>>702067333
>>702067355
>>702067699
>>702067888
this is now a get thread
>>702068150
Nice... !
oh, wait.
>>702068038
It works in a trivial ring, in which 0 = 1.
>>702065799
Yes but fuck ever writing that character out.
>>702068270
the only trivial ring here is my anus, faggot
>>702068038
>>702068346
Are you guys serious? Do you even math?? 0 != 1! No solution exist.
>>702067934
>>702062574
I've got an equation for you.
Solve that one
>>702068595
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_ring
>>702067315
this is one of those gay things they do at gay corporate gatherings where they try to teach their employees to "think outside the box"
This is literally irrational
So the answer is i
Imaginary numbers count right?
>>702067385
>order of operations
>BE-DM-AS, as I stated
>making me reply
>>702068658
OP = 1
Faggot = 0
they're different variables so naturally they can be different values
OP here btw
Consider this:
There is a universe, and next to that universe is another exact same universe.
but it is yours we can consider the equation:
If y=y+1
then you look over the next to the another exact same universe.
y+1=y+1
solve to get 0=0
Therefore it has no defined value. This is because there is no
3rd universe, and there is no 2nd universe. Only 1.
Thus it is mathematically impossible. This is comparable to the fact that
god does not exists. This is proved from the simpsons where
Homer proves to Flanders that god does not exist.
>>702063912
white should drop his gun. the other two will shoot each other. why would you shoot the unarmed person.
>>702068982
>why would you shoot the unarmed person
he's probably a cop
>>702062574
Like everything else in life, the correct answer is Jesus
>>702068671
nive try artin
>>702068658
Both variables are different, can't solve it :^)
>>702066843
>>702067355
Interesting.
>>702069050
did it say that white was black
>>702064003
Yes
The king's incompetence led to a lengthy civil war in which a sizable fraction of the kingdom's men were killed, resulting in an increased percentage of women.
Done faggots.
y = y + 1
0 = 1
So 0 and 1 are the same. Like the pic, you see 1 in one side and the 0 in the another side.
harugabadigabubaj
>>702069658
what in the fuck are you on about?
>>702062574
math major reporting in,
for our daily understanding of math and arithmetic; either there exists no such Y or proposition is false.
>no infinity is not the answer.
>no you are wrong
>don't insist you have no idea
for a definative answer, we need to know given axioms and definations. Such a discussion would need knowledge in abstract algebra or logic, maybe even model theory. Since given information does not answer questions such as;
>define y
>define =
>define 1
>define +
we can't conclude a definative answer.
y=1(plus or minis 1)
unceritnty
>>702069748
We see One and Zero like 2 dimension, but it's a 3 dimensionnumber. So you can have 1 = 0.
>>702068671
Haha. You guys are over complicating it.
>>702068612
those variables dont equate that way
the two c areas arent the same
>>702066851
That's really cool good job.
>>702069930
>3 dimensional number
yeah okay you're gonna have to elaborate
>>702070000
QUADS SPEAK THE TRUTH
>>702068658
I think you meant this:
>>702069954
>same base
>same height
they equal
learn trig faggot
>>702068931
directions never state you have to stay in the box.
>>702070000
Fk, you got quads. I have to be wrong.
>>702070087
ah i see
>>702063850
y += 1;
lul
y = y +1
1 = 1 + 1/y
y --> infinity
Fuck you
>>702062574
it's a simple calculus problem. at infinity, you either believe a difference of 1 between infinite numbers is irrelevant and decide they are equal, or you cannot conceptualize a difference of one at infinity, and thus you are a calculator fag and graph things in a window scalable to your comprehension level. The answer depends on the level of math you are capable of understanding
>>702069758
take a look at
>>702068270
>>702067942
>>702065799
You simply need to make some assumptions in order to make the question meaningful. Once you have them, you can draw some conclusions.
>>702070895
I think you missed a key part of calculus, friend
>>702064191
thank you. always graph first, then conceptualize
>>702064504
at infinity of y and infinity of x, both lines appear likewise. yes, a distance of +1 exists between both infinite lines, but at infinity does +1 matter?
prove wrong plz
>>702070955
that's true of everything we ever think about
>>702065167
you can, it creates an asymptote.
High school level calculus
>>702063772
I did it
>>702071320
Not necessarily.
In this case, you need some additional assumptions in order to do much with the problem.
In other cases, you may already have as many assumptions as you need and in still other cases there may be conflicting assumptions so that no meaningful conclusions can be drawn.
>>702065783
No real solutions exist. Google limits fag
>>702068346
>not being jewish
kys
>>702066851
scale your graph to infinity and decipher. Bet you can't TI-8nigger
>>702071514
>>702070759
pic is correct
40 - 32/2 = 4!
40 - 16 = 4!
24 = 4!
24 = 4*3*2*1
24 = 24
Fuck off .. 4chan does not like facts and maths, only statistics that calculate black violence since against whites, or how many time Indian prajeet shit on the streets. We only like exciting and unseenable stuffs
>>702064682
at least something good came out of this thread
>>702071539
no, what i meant is the obvious fact that you need to have some defined assumptions in order for any problem to make sense. in other words defined assumptions is a necessary but not sufficient condition for problems to make sense
ofc there may be conflicting assumptions or even with all the assumptions no logical conclusion can be drawn, that's not what i'm talking about
>>702063488
variables can have multiple values, ever take a math class beyond algebra?
>>702070955
yes, that is what I was trying to say, for we all know, it can be a group where + represents multiplication, then y can be any element of the group.
>>702062574
>>702062745
>>702062786
>>702063217
>>702063512
>>702063000
0=1. This is an example of the axiom of nontriviality not being satisfied.
>>702071946
not bad
>>702066865
Fucking retard
>>702072332
It always amazes me what I can learn on 4chan, and how truly smart some people are.
I've never heard this term, so I googled it and read upon it. I don't understand it. I know for a fact, my family, my friends and pretty much 80% of the people I know won't know what this is. Yet, to some this is probably easy, standard math everyone should know about.
Nothing like feeling like a dumbass on 4chan, haha...
>>702071514
kek
>>702072575
Is this truly the correct answer? I was assuming we wouldn't be able to curve the lines lol.
>>702063772
>>702072809
Glad to help!
>>702062574
First law of logic.
Everything is either A or Not-A.
Making your equation wrong
>>702073226
It always amazes me what I can learn on 4chan, and how truly smart some people are.
I've never heard this term, so I googled it and read upon it. I don't understand it. I know for a fact, my family, my friends and pretty much 80% of the people I know won't know what this is. Yet, to some this is probably easy, standard math everyone should know about.
Nothing like feeling like a dumbass on 4chan, haha...
Y = (1 + 1/2)
y-y = 1
1.5 - .5 = 1
>>702073478
You're welcome.
>>702073396
Out of curiosity, how do you know this?
Can you explain this to me more? Basically from what I can barely grasp, it has to do with essentially "noting" what is "important" in math and what isn't?
Fuck if I know lol.
>>702062574
It's fucking zero. Go fuck yourself.
>>702062574
Y is Y and not not Y or Y+X
>>702062745
>>702062786
These guys are right, if y approaches infinity via a limit then that is the only condition that would satisfy the equation.
Increment the value of variable y by 1 ...
No need 2 months for this ...
>>702062883
Murica!
>>702073482
More like 0 = 1
y=any integer that, if added to 1, must automatically be subtracted by 1
ex. y=y+1
6=[6+1]
6=[6+1]-1
6=6
done, faggots. now go to sleep
y=y+1
y=i
>>702073764
Infinity is a concept, not a quantity tho
>>702063401
Infinity is not a value chucklefuck
y=y+1
y-y=1
y=y+y-y
y=y
There you go retards
y
>>702074650
>>702074063
ahahahhahhahh i love these
y is in the set of integers modulo 1
>>702062574
y+=1;
Thank me later, i fixed your code.
>>702063132
This is actually what the answer is. For example the square root of 2 is the solution to the equation x-2 = 0. i is the solution to the equation x+1=0. Lots of weird numbers are defined this way. The problem with y-y+1 = 0 is even if you let y = infinity, which is already fucked up, you still have the same infinity minus itself, leaving you with 1=0. You could say "let W be the number that is the solution to y-y+1=0" but this is only generally done when that concept is useful in other ways. It would also require you to re-conceptualize how numbers with a W component act, just as you have to consider how complex numbers behave when you start talking about them. You can't just assume they work the same way as real numbers.
>>702062574
Y=Y+1
Y-1=Y
1/Y=1
Y=1
>>702074884
++y;
>>702074985
Touché
>>702073613
went to school for STEM related things and had a knack for math.
And sure. Basically we have axioms to define "fields." In the reals (i.e. the open set from -inf to inf) these are all axioms that we've heard before such as 1*a=a as the multiplicative identity and ab=ba as the multiplicative commutativity, etc. We have these axioms established because we must define what multiplication and addition and such are or else all subsequent proofs fall flat.
However in any arbitrary set, (say S) we have to prove that these axioms hold in order to be called a field. So the nontriviality axiom is important in defining a field, thus if it is not satisfied, then wherever the "y" in OP's equation comes from, does not come from a field.
>>702062574
There.. is no "answer". You can't meaningfully reduce it any further.
>>702074901
yeah someone sort of did it already:
>>702066843
>>702067355
>>702074063
More like 7 = 6
>>702068735
no it's not, and you crossed the top and right lines
Why?
>>702075280
no because-
the rule is if you add it to 1, you must subtract 1 from it
so y=y+1
6=6+1-1 by definition
>>702063512
f(y) is a different thing than y. That's the point of the function, to transform the y you put in into another number. f(y) not being equal to y is normal because f(y) is not y.
y++;
int main(int argc, const char * argv[]){
int y = 0;
y++;
printf("output:%d",y);
return 1;
}
>>702067333
how can a program this short be this retarded
>>702075443
Aww.
>>702074985
>>702074884
You both beat me to it.
>>702063912
Mr. White needs to get the fuck out.
>>702075448
Out of curiosity, why the arguments in main? I've only ever seen main with no arguments or void as argument (and that one is technically wrong).
>>702075424
SO ultimately you just changed 1 to 0 by definition making it a different equation of 6=6+0
>>702067019
Who told you that? Algebra isn't the only way to represent a function and you absolutely can prove something with a graph.
>>702063837
> 6/2(1+2)
> 6/2(3)
> 3(3)
> 9
Easy shit.
>>702075856
what i did is said that if you add a number to 1, that number has to have 1 subtracted from it
so let me put the minus signs in better places:
y=y+1
6=(6-1)+1
6=6
i did define a new kind of thing, i'll call it the 4chanfaggot integer, which must have 1 subtracted from it if you add 1 to it
>>702067385
It's not one.
Refer to >>702075989
Or just google it.
y = |.5|
I do good, yes?
>>702075680
Guessing you don't work with c much.
>>702062574
False
This is a logical fallacy.
In algebra Y must represent a term (not infinity); and the only way to solve for Y is to subtract it from itself - giving us 0 = 1 which is wrong.
These stupid ass problems only serve as argument starters, and those "Princeton mathematicians" are fucking stupid.
>>702075140
Interesting! I think I understand it, but I don't know if I'd be able to explain it. Either way, cheers.
Why did the chicken cross the road?
To get to the other side.
>>702075140
>>702076105
I'm pretty beginner at all of it. I'm more familiar with C than anything else, but that's really not saying much. I've only had a couple introductory CS courses.
(Y = y+1) * 0
0 = 0
Ez
>>702062574
I don't really think this is possible since Y will always equal 1 more than itself.
So if Y were 1, then Y would also be 2, which would mean Y would actually be 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and so on.
Wait i fucking understand.
Y=The current diameter of the Universe, 1= the expansion of the universe.
>>702064682
Could someone screen cap this?
>>702062883
>0 = 1
>>702069658
Nicely done, nigger man
>>702076018
Are you gay?
(6-1) = (6-1) + 1
You can't change the valor of y
>>702062574
This isn't an equation.
Just because I write 3 = 4, that doesn't make it true, because 3 does not equal four.
You should write y ≠ y + 1, because that's the truth.
>>702064682
roast.jpg
y=y-1
>>702076018
The 4chanfaggot integer will revolutionize modern mathematics.. THREE CHEERS
>>702062574
Y is constant (Of the universe) Y+1 Would mean time is changing to allow it to happen. Ergo if you were in a ship Traveling at C, and you walked 1mph your total speed would still be Y, but to the outside observer you would never take that step as time has stopped for all practical purposes.
y = c, because c + anything is still c.
>>702076532
It's valid in basically any programming language that uses standard math syntax though.
>>702062574
Divide Y/Y to make each 1, then add one.
The answer is 2.
>>702076037
It's order of ops.
PEMDAS
Parenthesis, exponent, multiplication, division, addition, subtraction.
>6/2(1+2)
>Distribute into parenthesis
>6/(2+4)
>6/6
>1
Although anyone who answers the question correctly is a newfag, that's the point of refuting the information. I saved you this time newfags, I won't next time.
>>702076523
the left side isn't being added to 1. do you understand what the fuck i wrote? if you add 1 to it, you must subtract 1 from it
yes you fucking can change the value of y, if y is a 4chanfaggot integer. get used to it
>>702062574
it'close to y=7/4, but its some value like 2^-1 and i dont know which one...
Am i close op?
>>702062574
y = y = y = y = y + y = 1
ggezwpglhfty
>>702067315
I am quite sure this is impossible
>>702076684
What I'm saying is, if you can solve the equation, by subtracting y from both sides, and the answer is 0 = 1. That's obviously not true. So the true answer is y ≠ y + 1.
>>702076987
It is. Look up the Utility Problem
alright faggos, i'm looking for a few /b/ros to play overwatch PTR with, tired of dumb teams. reply with your skype name if you're in. I'm 19 myself but im fine with playing with some older fellas, as long as you're not the guy playing hanzo every game no matter what map or game mode it is.
>>702076626
fuck yeah, cheers
this was meant to be its own thread. excuse me for being a fucking half wit
>>702062574
What if Y is the square root of 1? would that work?
>>702077521
>/vg/owg/
>>702076267
Actually had to look it up, but based on http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3144316/when-main-is-defined-without-parameters-will-argc-and-argv-still-be-present-on#3144427
int main(void)
and
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
are both valid.
Usually I see int main(int argc, char **argv) used.
>>702063276
Two months ago
>>702062574
it's not true in the real number system, you have to use something more esoteric like where the successor function takes a parameter and returns the same parameter, which has all kinds of simplistic retarded consequences soprobably not worth studying
so I posted first with...
y = infinity
that's the correct answer still.
infinity is a number and it has its own symbol, sideways 8.
mathfags says 1 = 0
mathfags say male feminists = getsex
mathfags say red = blue
>>702063772
Roll it into a cylinder and then do the lines.
>>702063912
mr. white needs to not worry, because blacks are always at fault, and mr gray should know that.
>>702064232
32+16 = 20 + x
x = 28
Answer: 28 cm^2
>>702063772
Since A and F are freefloating, just swap them for now. Solve, then deform as necessary.
>>702062574
first off they're using letters not numbers soooo
>>702078000
When u use main(int argc, char** argv), it means that u're using command line argument where argc represent number of arguments and **argv arguments themselves. For e.g, when u compile program and u run it like ./a.out 1 2 3
argc would be equal to 4 and argv[0] == ./a.out, argv[1] = 1 and so on.
When u use main(void), it simply means that main has no arguments
>>702077153
it's not the utility problem, and it's pretty fucking easy to solve... 3 or 4 anons have already posted different possible solutions
>>702062574
You guys are morons
Y= Y+1
For every Y there is in a problem it would equel Y+1
ayo Ill suck your cock if you can correctly answer these three questions.......
what......is x^2-2x-35 factored?
what.....is 16x^2 + 8xy + y^2, factored?
what.....is 3x^3+6x^2+7x+14, factored?
>>702075337
doesn't specify you have to stay in the box, don't blame me for your poorly worded problem
>>702063837
This is less a problem with order of operations than an issue of "if you write ambiguous shit like this you deserve it if your rocket crashes into Jupiter".
>>702063912
This one is really troll. Gray and Black are higher priority targets to each other, so he should try to miss on purpose so they duke it out first.
>>702064003
The plan works because people kill off their sons to get more kids. Also known as, China backwards.
>>702062574
Solution: Do not elect Donald Trump to the Presidency
>>702080578
this
>>702078666
I'm aware of that, but I didn't know main with no arguments was valid. I figured that was something that came from c++.
>>702080578
mistake in second line. If you add 1 to the right hand side, it becomes y = y + 1 again, because you can't add something to only one side of an equation.
>>702078594
why 32+16 = 20+x?
>>702062574
Maths graduate with PhD here. There is no solution.
y = speed of light.
