Portal | Manuals | References | Downloads | Info | Programs | JCLs | Mainframe wiki | Quick Ref

Author Message
jkbytes

Active User

Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 141
Location: South Africa

 Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 3:37 pm    Post subject: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws?? Hi, Can U Prove 3=2?? This seems to be an anomaly or whatever u call in mathematics. It seems, Ramanujam found it but never disclosed it during his life time and that it has been found from his dairy. See this illustration: -6 = -6 9-15 = 4-10 adding 25/4 to both sides: 9-15+25/4 = 4-10+25/4 Changing the order 9+25/4-15 = 4+25/4-10 (this is just like a square + b square - two a b = (a-b)square.) Here a = 3, b=5/2 for L.H.S and a =2, b=5/2 for R.H.S. So it can be expressed as follows: (3-5/2)(3-5/2) = (2-5/2)(2-5/2) Taking positive square root on both sides: 3 - 5/2 = 2 - 5/2 3 = 2 ????????

arunoday

New User

Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 18
Location: Bangalore

 Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws?? Hi, The following is not true always : if (a-b)^2 = (c-b)^2 then (a-b) = (c-b) The right expression will be : if (a-b)^2 = (c-b)^2 then (a-b) = +/-(c-b) If you take the + sign then only 2 = 3 otherwise not. Let us not make 2=3.
jkbytes

Active User

Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 141
Location: South Africa

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws??

 arunoday wrote: Let us not make 2=3.

I wonder what does that mean.......
arunoday

New User

Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 18
Location: Bangalore

 Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws?? hi, This is a simple joke - " Let us not make 2=3. " On the serious part - Let us take a = 3, b= 2, c = 5/2 The expression with square ( in the whole sqaure form ) is - (3-5/2)(3-5/2) = (2-5/2)(2-5/2) This reduces to (a -c ) square = (b -c) square ....... (1) The falacy is - if you accept ( 3 - 2 ) equals a non-zero value then this Ramanujam statement does not stand as follows - (a-c) square - (b-c) square = 0 [ From (1) ] or ( (a-c) + (b-c) ) * ( (a-c) - (b-c) ) = 0 or ( a-2c + b) * (a -b) = 0 ......(2) Now the falacy comes - For this equation to be satisfied either (a-2c+b) has to be equal to zero or (a-b) has to be equal to zero or both the factors have to be equal to zero Here if we put value of a,b,c we get - (3 -2*5/2 + 2) * (3-2) = 0 [ From 2 ] The first factor is already becoming equal to zero so the whole expression is becoming zero and there is no need that second factor to be zero. So ( 3-2 ) not equal to zero So 3 not equal to 2 If we take ( 3 - 2 ) = 0 then there will be no difference between the numbers 3 and 2. Because as a result of subtraction zero is produced only when we subtract the number from itself. SO 3 CAN NEVER BE EQUAL TO 2. IT IS ACTUALLY A FALACY AND NOT A FACT. Thanks
jkbytes

Active User

Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 141
Location: South Africa

 Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:35 am    Post subject: Re: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws?? woooooooooooo, Toooooo much of mathematics is not good for my health..... But let us consider. Let a=0; b=0 ; therefore a+b =0; Which brings that 2a=3a=a=0; so a+b=3a; substitute a=2a 2a+0 = 3a; 2a=3a cancellling a on both sides 2=3. Iam not sure about this but i guess some theorem stands behind this strongly.
David P

Active User

Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 106
Location: Cincinnati Ohio

 Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:50 am    Post subject: Hi jkbytes, Its getting really intersting...but I think one point you missed here ... if 2a=3a and a=0; you can not cancel a from both the sides. You can cancel only nonzero values from both side of any equation. other wise not only you can prove 2=3 but you can prove all the numbers equal to each other. I hope you got what I am saying. Though I am really enjoying these calculations. regards, David.
jkbytes

Active User

Joined: 19 Feb 2005
Posts: 141
Location: South Africa

 Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 11:47 am    Post subject: Re: Ramanujam's proof!!.... can u find any flaws?? Hi david, As you have mentioned this is getting interesting eachtime. Even though i'm not able to prove 2=3, i was able to prove that two part of something is equal to three part of the same thing. provided the thing is null. converse: vice versa.
 All times are GMT + 6 Hours
 Page 1 of 1

Search our Forum:

 Topic Author Forum Replies Posted Similar Topics Command to find TMEMBER name for a TPIPE Siva NKK Kothamasu IMS DB/DC 0 Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:08 pm find RACF group for access to spooled... jzhardy JCL & VSAM 1 Mon May 08, 2017 11:46 am To find out size allocated to a seque... ashek15 JCL & VSAM 15 Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:42 am find particular member name in PDS us... ravi243 CLIST & REXX 10 Mon Dec 19, 2016 6:44 pm How to find the first monday of the w... abdulrafi COBOL Programming 10 Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:24 pm

 © 2003-2017 IBM MAINFRAME Software Support Division
 Job Vacancies | Forum Rules | Bookmarks | Subscriptions | FAQ | Polls | Contact Us