Use Self hypnosis to reprogram your mind: bit.ly/2xo1QBU

@GuyFawkx

25 күн бұрын

Get Lost Buddy ! lol

I'm so glad that one guy challenged the Dewey Decimal System. Librarians around the world are eternally grateful.

I consider the "problem" is linguistic, rather than actually mathematical. One dollar equals one hundred cents. So 1x1=1 is numerical, but if you're saying 1 dollar x 1 dollar = 1 dollar that is a linguistic inadequacy, that needs to be seen as different. If I say 100 cents x 1 = 100 cents, the linguistic inadequacy is resolved. It is the language we use, and how we communicate and understand that language that needs to improve.

@JamesDirtRC

3 ай бұрын

Thank you.

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

Nothing needs to improve though, I've never heard a single person in the history of mankind try to say "1 dollar times 1 dollar" until Terrence Howard, it doesn't even make sense. In what situation would you ever want or need to say that? Not to mention, 1 dollar times 1 dollar is 1 dollar², you must apply multiplication and division to units as well as the values. A dollar² obviously makes no sense and that's how you immediately know the calculation you are doing is wrong/nonsensical

@sumikolibby3203

2 ай бұрын

And medicare and lack of communication is #1 reason for divorce rates. Come on people please. Wasn't the world once flat and the sun circled around us.

@stubbybutt8839

2 ай бұрын

you cant times a object by a object. ie i cant have apples groups of apples. even a second grader can comprehend this.

@expomm

2 ай бұрын

@@vicc6790Terrence is too much on drugs dude!

Terrance Howard 😳😳that I neverrrrrrr ! 😍🥰🥰. I will watch this 1 more time , that was amazing ..

So glad Howard has something

@invisibletoyou00

3 ай бұрын

Yep schizophrenia

Much of the problem comes down to exactly how we define the word ‘multiply’

@herbiewalkermusic

3 ай бұрын

@@mikkinikki1902I don’t think I understand this question

@moondar8660

3 ай бұрын

Speaking to the multiply vs addition debate where the only way to get a baby is to "add" sperm to the egg to get the baby...I was considering that we don't "multiply" the female egg by, (for example, a million sperm). That would truly be an unbalanced equation. It becomes more of the same of what you already have.@@herbiewalkermusic

This video makes perfect sense. I don't know why people are getting confused..

@oliverbuenslep6270

3 ай бұрын

So obvious when you can see it so clearly!!

@BillyBullshitter

3 ай бұрын

@@oliverbuenslep6270 my pet cat even understood it.

@wayne3093

2 ай бұрын

@@BillyBullshitter same

@zachz1018

2 ай бұрын

Because they are speaking the math out One group of one equals one. But the math actually represents. Each number represents a group size of that number. 1 dollar times 1 dollar means you have two dollars present. When it's just raw abstract numbers not representing anything. Then it can represent 1 group of 1. But as soon as you make it represent an actual thing, tied to reality instead of the abstract, then 1x1=2

@BillyBullshitter

2 ай бұрын

@@zachz1018 facts right there

I Love this Stuff

Amzing

TY🙏🏻I rarely get sick in the sea. In a way. We're in the sea of humanity. The sickness of sameness's sanity? Once you take a bite you've bitten.

This was incredible. The math stuff is cool but nobody seems to be talking about the 2 bombshells he dropped during his presentation. One is that he knows a guy that has the cure for Cancer & AIDS and the other is that his life may be in danger because of his findings. Let that frequency sink in.

@humberto45333

3 ай бұрын

You seriously believe this guy?

@patb5889

2 ай бұрын

I hear u load an clear that is true 👍

@wayne3093

2 ай бұрын

Anyone with any real intelligencs knows he is right about everything. That makes him very dangerous to the powers in control because people gaining knowledge makes them free.

@Garden_Of_Eden_

2 ай бұрын

The imbalance in wealth distribution in society can be explained without this wrong maths he is bringing. Scientist, engineers all know that approximations exists especially for academic purposes. What he is saying if correct is not likely to apply to the material world. What he doing is similar to questioning what 1 means fundamentally.

@wayne3093

2 ай бұрын

@@Garden_Of_Eden_ So you don't understand at all, i get that not everyone can comprehend because it takes an unfettered mind. Some just want to live in slavery, like the guy in the matrix who sold everyone out for a fake steak.

Love the banking analogy 👍🏼😁🙏🕊🔥🎯

@mannysense3703

4 ай бұрын

Bank, river bank where people exchanged goods, commerce...origin of word

@invisibletoyou00

3 ай бұрын

I think the banking analogy was the funniest part of his ..what is it called he was doing again.. comedy stand up at Oxford

@wayne3093

Ай бұрын

@@invisibletoyou00 when are you putting out the evidence or facts that prove him wrong, itstead of just flapping your gums on a keypad.

I would be impressed if he spoke to a room of mathematicians about his beliefs. I seem to recall that he was invited to speak at Oxford to address actors, not scientists. He is stringing together a bunch of random things to sound intelligent. For instance, what does the Dewey decimal system have to do with math? It is a way to classify books in a library. He throws out random information to sound intelligent, but it is essentially meaningless.

@user-qc6ic4lz8z

2 ай бұрын

And you're ignorant

@Ayeyo-cd8ym

2 ай бұрын

I just realized he said the Dewey 😆

@myPrzeslaw

17 күн бұрын

He wasn't invited to speak at Oxford. He was invited to speak at Oxford Union - a private discussion club separate from Oxford University. Known e.g. for inviting OJ Simpson straight after his murder trial or few other controversial speakers.

The Collatz conjecture is a famous unsolved math problem that states that any positive integer will always end up in an infinite loop if you start with it. The conjecture asks if repeating two simple arithmetic operations will eventually transform every positive integer into 1

@user-qc6ic4lz8z

2 ай бұрын

Ummmmm ok soooooo.....

We built math from the top down so when it gets small it breaks down that's why the binary gets confusing but at the same time so amazing.

A little bit of truth and a little bit of misinformation creates a mess always

Brilliant simply Brilliant

When he says we can't travel in a straight line to another planet it makes sense. Mars would be busy circulating the sun. So to calculate how we'll land on mars we would move in a curve/bend to get there and predict where mars will be when we leave earth in this and that time.

@myPrzeslaw

17 күн бұрын

How does the fact that Mars is in movement and we have to calculate its future position imply that we can't get to that position in a straight line?

THE ONE

His argument sounds like the answers I'd give to essay questions in elementary school when I didn't know the answers. They got marked wrong. Objects are not multiplied by objects; objects are multiplied by quantities. Has he never placed or fulfilled a purchase order? As for the questionable economic stability, isn't that because minted dollars are no longer backed by gold? I agree that certain math is ridiculous, but what is he on?

@wffj-tv2652

4 ай бұрын

I like your purchase order analogy (I used to reconcile purchase orders with packing lists) I add to your point: Numbers are abstract representations, not real things. In a math problem of 1x1=1 the first number represents the subject, and the second number represents the frequency, or rate that subject occurs. For example, if I have a bunch of candy bars and I give you one candy bar, one time then you will have one candy bar (1 x 1 =1)...If I'm taking pictures and pressing the shutter release button creates one picture, and I press that button one time, then I will have one picture in my file (1x1=1). No laws of thermodynamics are broken here, and laws of physics remain intact.

@ObscenelyMarvelous

4 ай бұрын

@@wffj-tv2652 Yes. Math was my weakest subject, but basic math was easy because it only required common sense in practical and concrete terms. The frequency or rate of the subject can also be described as the quantity of occurrences. That's why we read the multiplication symbol as "times", as in how many times the subject occurs. This video is absurd. Why would a person with no understanding of math, talking about math, even have an audience? I've seen a lot of videos lately of people saying "increase your (whatever) by 10x", but they pronounce it as 10-ex as if they think it's the letter x rather than a multiplication symbol that's meant to be read as "times". I guess it's a general lack of common sense that's causing people to jump on the bandwagon. So when the guy in this video rants, people listen because they don't know what they, themselves, are talking about either.

@user-sr3on1fg7y

3 ай бұрын

I see you are correct in your assumptions, and I'm not proficient in math at all, but what I understood from what he said is not that you are wrong, but that multiplying object by a quantity does not represent what is happening in our universe and is only an abstraction in our math. So what I got from him is that you have to multiply object by and object or energy by energy or whatever in order to represent what is really happening in the universe, because energy * 0 can't be equal to 0, energy in universe cannot be destroyed. Not that our math is wrong by itself, but that the way it works does not represent reality. So when he said for ex: you have an apple and multiplication is adding 3 times that apple you are adding it to the existing apple so in universe laws it would be 1*3=4. Multiplication 1*0 is an addition of 1 apple by 0 times more of that apple, which according to him would equal to 1 apple. I might be wrong tho, but that is what I understood from him.

@ObscenelyMarvelous

3 ай бұрын

@@user-sr3on1fg7y The energy math he's proposing still doesn't make sense, multiplication doesn't work the same as addition. In practical terms, energy multiplied by 0 means that the energy is not receiving attention and has become dormant. I refer again to my purchase order analogy. Multiplying by at least 1 means pulling the energy from the shelf and adding it to the box. Multiplying by 0 means leaving the energy on the shelf and not putting any energy in the box. Energy doesn't cease to exist, it ceases to be utilized.

@user-sr3on1fg7y

3 ай бұрын

@ObscenelyMarvelous Yea, I understand your concept, but his concept differs from yours. In what he is saying it does not really matter if the energy is on the shelf or in the box, if you refer to it in your equation it only has to be in existence in the reality in order to reflect what is happening in the universe. Or if I follow your example correctly, he states that having a multiplication with the energy by 0, you actually utilize the energy and pull it into the box, but since you multiply it by nothing else, you end up only with the energy in the box. Multiplying the energy by 1 would mean you will need two of the same energies in existence to complete the equation, which would equal to 2 energies in the box. This approach from my view is more based on what is actually existent in our reality, while conventional math can be more abstract than that, and from what I understand from him, it might not reflect reality objectively, but only closely approximate it.

What does it mean to multiply?

1:03 First line: √2 ≈ 1.41 instead (as you stated more or less correctly before). Notice also that 2 = (√2)², so it is unsurprising that (√2)³/2 = (√2)³/(√2)²= √2, while the same does not work for √3 or any other radicand; it *cannot* work. The square root can be defined using power laws as taking a value to the power of ½: (√x)² = [x^(½)]² = x^(½ · 2) = x¹ = x. 1:19 [√(3)/2]³ = [√(3)]³/2³ = √(3) [√(3)]²/8 = (3/8) √3 ≈ 0.64 instead. [√(3/2)]³ ≈ 1.83 instead. There is no interpretation in which (√3/2)³ = 2.589 as you claim. Probably you are using your calculator (app) wrong. For example, in order to calculate [√(3)/2]³, you have to type "3", "√", "/", "2", "=", "x^y", "3", "="; in *that* order (starting a calculation with typing "√", "3" in the Windows 10 Calculator app is equivalent to typing just "3", for example). Alternatively, if there are keys/buttons for parentheses, you have to push/touch them at the right time to put them in the right places.

Something tells me it makes sense, even though I don't understand it at this point. Will do my own research though. I find it interesting because it challenges what I think I know....Mmm

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

It's wrong.

@wayne3093

2 ай бұрын

@@vicc6790 You are wrong.

Well new information always comes from PERSON, PLACE OR THINGS BY DESIGN...🎉 👀👂👂✨

In physics, actions don't simply stack up to result in another action of the same type. Instead, when two actions interact, they produce a reaction. Think of it this way: Action multiplied by Action equals Reaction (Action x Action = Reaction). This means that the outcome isn't just another action, but a reaction, which is a response to the combination of the two actions. Additionally, if you divide this reaction by one of the original actions (Reaction / Action), the result is still classified as a reaction. This division is essential to make sense of the interactions under the laws of physics. Remember, both multiplication and division are necessary to fully understand these concepts. Physics and mathematics synergistically ensure the accuracy of scientific principles through the use of laws, formulas, and logical reasoning. Mathematics provides the language and framework necessary to formulate and solve physical problems. Equations and formulas serve as the essential tools with which physicists describe relationships and predict the outcomes of physical interactions. For instance, consider the concept of "action" in physics, which can be quantified in units of energy or force. Mathematically, multiplying two "actions" together would not result in another "action" but rather a "reaction," possibly in units of energy squared or another relevant unit. This illustrates how physics and mathematics integrate to validate theories both theoretically and empirically, thus ensuring their accuracy. The ongoing interplay between mathematical rigor and experimental verification lays the cornerstone of scientific reliability and precision. Physical theories are empirically tested; predictions made based on mathematical calculations must hold true when tested experimentally. This supports the validity of the theories. For example, Newton’s second law, ( F=ma ) (force equals mass times acceleration), mathematically relates force, mass, and acceleration. Algebraic manipulations allow these equations to be rearranged and adjusted under specific rules, ensuring that all mathematical operations-addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division-are performed consistently and accurately. Physics uses these mathematical frameworks not only to describe but also to predict natural phenomena. The precision of these mathematical predictions is constantly tested through experiments and observations, maintaining the integrity and accuracy of scientific understandings. This rigorous testing confirms the robustness of the theoretical frameworks provided by physics and mathematics.

One of the biggest challenges with his speech is that there is truth mixed with false information and unless you can differentiate the two you'll resort to one. For example just because he is right about becoming interstellar dosn't make him automatically right about math. No bank multiplies money, they all add it. He goes on to do this throughout his whole lecture and as covincing as it sounds the average person cant discern between the two because as soon as they hear something that makes sense to them they automatically conclude he is right about the whole thing. While I think he has very valid points in somethings it is highly skewed in others. I believe i. even more certain when he was combative towards some of the questions. Rather than answer them directly he answered them indirectely presenting random historical facts going on to talk about something else like when he dismissed the math question and went straight to the reason why he pattened his work. The best way I understand the multiplication factor is from Harry Potter when the cups kept multiplying.

Do not forget: He´s an actor.

We will never expand as a species as long as we have small minded people

@wayne3093

Ай бұрын

Loads on here.

Exactly what I been sayin The Math Aint Mathin' Yawl!! Thank You God for Truth😊

I think the main issue is the fact that theyre trying to overcomplicate it. Let's review. Apparently 1 quarter x 1 quarter cannot equal one quarter, but I don’t think the syntax is correct here. See, multiplication doesn’t work the way they're explaining it. If anything, the way theyre going about it in the video is almost mindnumbingly complicated. You can definitely multiply a quarter by one, but not multiply it by another quarter. Because at that point, you're introducing a whole other quarter to the equation and now there's suddenly two quarters. You can do this in addition, but not multiplication. Multiplication takes a thing and multiplies it by a set, like if you have five seeds and then multiply it once, that five is one SET. If you double it, there are TWO sets. Not a direct quote, but the notion of "1 seed x 1 wouldn’t work because it doesn’t account for the fact that after you plant it, you'll have far more" is absolutely convoluted. You have one seed. That one seed is its set. You take that set and double it, you’ll have two seeds. Because when you're counting seeds in a set, you're not asking about the seed's offspring, but how many you have on-hand. In conclusion, decent video, but I think Terrence might be overthinking it just a bit.

@TheAster24

4 ай бұрын

By extension, Action x Action doesn't work. Actions cannot be multiplied. You can take an action and have multiple action as a whole, but that isn't multiplication of those actions. You ADD actions to reach a final reaction. For example: Plant a seed (action) + Water the seed (action) = Seed grows into a plant (Reaction)

@Destroyer-s2e

4 ай бұрын

The loop that he was talking about in The beginning is that a known thing within the scientific and mathematical community? Like they acknowledge it and it's a known thing. Pretty much nothing new rigth ?

@c.d.osajotiamaraca3382

3 ай бұрын

That's also wrong. 2 actions x 2 actions = 4 actions. As exemplified by 4 people moving their left arm.@@TheAster24

@MsSoFruity

2 ай бұрын

@@c.d.osajotiamaraca3382 In physics, actions don't simply stack up to result in another action of the same type. Instead, when two actions interact, they produce a reaction. Think of it this way: Action multiplied by Action equals Reaction (Action x Action = Reaction). This means that the outcome isn't just another action, but a reaction, which is a response to the combination of the two actions.Additionally, if you divide this reaction by one of the original actions (Reaction / Action), the result is still classified as a reaction. This division is essential to make sense of the interactions under the laws of physics. Remember, both multiplication and division are necessary to fully understand these concepts. Physics and mathematics synergistically ensure the accuracy of scientific principles through the use of laws, formulas, and logical reasoning. Mathematics provides the language and framework necessary to formulate and solve physical problems. Equations and formulas serve as the essential tools with which physicists describe relationships and predict the outcomes of physical interactions.For instance, consider the concept of "action" in physics, which can be quantified in units of energy or force. Mathematically, multiplying two "actions" together would not result in another "action" but rather a "reaction," possibly in units of energy squared or another relevant unit. This illustrates how physics and mathematics integrate to validate theories both theoretically and empirically, thus ensuring their accuracy. The ongoing interplay between mathematical rigor and experimental verification lays the cornerstone of scientific reliability and precision.Physical theories are empirically tested; predictions made based on mathematical calculations must hold true when tested experimentally. This supports the validity of the theories. For example, Newton’s second law, ( F=ma ) (force equals mass times acceleration), mathematically relates force, mass, and acceleration. Algebraic manipulations allow these equations to be rearranged and adjusted under specific rules, ensuring that all mathematical operations-addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division-are performed consistently and accurately.Ultimately, physics uses these mathematical frameworks not only to describe but also to predict natural phenomena. The precision of these mathematical predictions is constantly tested through experiments and observations, maintaining the integrity and accuracy of scientific understandings. This rigorous testing confirms the robustness of the theoretical frameworks provided by physics and mathematics.

@iambars1784

2 ай бұрын

In your example of “sets”: if we have 2 boxes with 5 apples in each, we would say there are 5 apples per box or 5 apples in each box. Now what if there is no box just 5 apples. We would say 5 apples. In other words there is no need to ever multiply sumthing by itself win you can simply state the number. So by your example everything in multiplication is a set yet what if it isn’t a set; rather individual items.

How can you define something that doesn't exist? Once you are conscious of nothingness, it becomes something that needs to be defined, and it's no longer nothing. Why is important to know what nothing is? It becomes important when something is nothing that does not exist because we know that it does not exist because we exist. In the whole universe, there's only what exists and what doesn't. We can only see what is, but somehow humans are worried about what isn't. Everything that was, everything that is and everything that will have been created or will be created. Everything that was didn't disappear because consciousness gave confirmation that existed. The things that aren't are dormant, waiting to be manifested into the reality where the "is" belong. Consciousness is a creative power, but not the trigger of creation. Our whole dimension is part of many that came to be and the dimensions that haven't are in a process of becoming because of a developing consciousness. It's like books on a shelf with infinite tiers. The consciousnesses who leave are placed back into the shelf and await for further purpose. Matter cannot be destroyed. Consciousness becomes matter when the collective becomes aware of it and therefore, cannot be destroyed. The creative power we call God, is the Sovreign of that knowledge. He is the gatekeeper. We only know what we know because it has been revealed to us. He always been, always is and always will be. There's only the creator and creation. Dark and light. Nothing and something. Consciousness and oblivion. It's not hard to understand, but it is hard to define with words that the normal human consciousness can perceive. It is very hard to dismiss the fact that there's an Ultimate Intelligence. The whole universe points out to intelligent design. We cannot see the dimension of nothingness for the same reason we cannot see all light spectrum or waves and frequencies and we cannot see the books on top of a very tall shelf. Humans depend too much on their 5 primary senses and limit themselves to those experiences. When we as a species learn to transcend those senses and rise up to our full untapped unmanifested potential, then we will be able to see what and who is on top of those symbolic shelves of creation. Humans will not become interstellar until the knowledge, the will, the time and the purpose for that task is revealed. It seems chaotic because of our lack of knowledge, but everything from the beginning is happening by design. We can readjust our math, become faster in our calculations, discover the laws that govern the cosmos, but we cannot truly command it to be. We are only spectators waiting for the next act.

@ikiedenning2397

3 ай бұрын

It's when all that is real is revealed. Once it's revealed, it becomes our reality. Then, we move on to the next phase.

@konatheblarbarian6869

3 ай бұрын

nothing is potential, what isn't yet. it's a misnomer from intellectualism nothing is formlessness, like kindness has no form, it's a potential experienced in form the nature of Consciouness if formless requiring form to be expressed into experience

@konatheblarbarian6869

3 ай бұрын

intellect is not the answer, it follows the answers and holds them, remembers the experience, amongst other secondary applucations

Mages or “Magi”, always refer to “imagination” being the core factor in how powerful or stable oneself’s “mind” is. Our Earthly human specifications are just fractions of what our ancestors were capable of.

Terrence should be a tenured professor at asylums and mental institutions.

I agree. We should be following a base 12 math in my opinion.. Why? We have 12 hours and we humaan bound to time..

Damn 😮

Seems to me like "potential" would be a missing unit in the math when the pne eeed example was stated around 10:12 in the video. This "potential" is also a missing factor in the example following the "seed" example.

A lie is a world we live in the food we eat so on

One of one is still only one. It’s a matter of semantics.

@myPrzeslaw

17 күн бұрын

It's more a matter of definitions. Unfortunately, in that material there are none.

Well, damn! 😮

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

if this blew your mind you need to re take second grade math

Notice how it always works out for the bank. Cuz it could go either way.

I have an other paradox for you! We are told there's no time on the other side... Yet here we are...were there is time. If that's true... We are at two places at once... somewhere were there's no time and another were there is time . Thank God I'm not an atheist! Our I wouldn't have thought about it at all! 😂

@konatheblarbarian6869

3 ай бұрын

dualities perspective is the only paradox, and no religion will help you understand this because its experiential, sure the correct words can guide you to that experience. and new age is a religion also, so not a good guide either. look at the patterns of near death experiences, both of heaven and hell, there's also those that have retained memories from before incarnating, both the after and before experiences, experiential, are a better guide than any religion

Terrence is spot on. And they know it.

I find his thoughts to be interesting. But theres this… The second “1” in the equation of 1x1 is more of a descriptive word. It’s saying 1 “one time” In which case the answer is distinctly one.

Whoop that trick😂

Could we calculate symmetry in a imperfect universe 3 6 9 .3333333. . .possibly a quantum calculation.

3 6 and 9 hold the answer to unlocking the flower

1 multiplied by 1 is only 1 1 dollar multipled by 1 is 1 How many plies is the question.

1*0=Reaction. Reaction=creation+ Observation

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

1*0 = lamp. Lamp = Truck + Llama. I can make up equations with words too!

Terrence is right. 1x1=1 never made any sense to me. He is onto something. Action+Action=Reaction

@richardlong9785

3 ай бұрын

Same here... only that was in the 1960s I thought I was the stupid one.

@4800BMO

3 ай бұрын

It’s just one, one time. That’s why the answer is one. You’re just thinking of it backwards which is the way we were taught. There is no such thing as one times one. It’s just one, one time.

@NewaccountNumber

3 ай бұрын

​@@4800BMO1 × 1 is 2 in 1 group, so the comment above us still correct.

@4800BMO

3 ай бұрын

I guess when you say one multiplied by one equals two it kinda makes sense. Only because multiplied implies addition. You win.

@NewaccountNumber

3 ай бұрын

@@4800BMO If you multiplied 1 car × 1 car, how much car you have?

So is addition and multiplication the same? Is subtraction and division the same?

If ppl can accept this maybe we will be able to see past the lies of the heliocentric model

The way I learned math was .... say you go to the library 5 times and each time you grab 1 book how many books do you have? You go to the store 17 times and each time you get no candy how many candies do you have... In this example math works just fine.

@wrc1210

2 ай бұрын

Your library example falls apart due to the guy that challenged the Dewey Decimal system, lol.

But what does it mean to time?

I'm not a mathematician so allow me to sound ignorant in thinking that multiplication is a simple process of adding sets. So, if you have 1 set that contains 1 item, you have 1 item. If you have one set that contains 3 items, it is 3. I you have 5 sets that contains 3 items you give fifteen items. So that is easy to also understand that 1 times 0 is 0, so if you have 1 set with no items, then there are no items. Multiplication is not the same as addition. If you want to create a different system for a different purpose, then go ahead and say 1 x 1 = 2 but give us a different name so we can differentiate between the two systems. So sure 1 x 1 = 2, 2 x 2 = 4, is 4 x 4 = 8?

According to his logic, 1*1=2, if you put let’s say a tennis ball in a box, take it out, put it back in the box, if you do that ten times, in the end there will be ten tennis balls in the box, because you put the tennis ball ten times in the box

Did anybody find this richard dover stater beyond the decimal time thing?

How do you produce the correct frequencies?

Hu. Look into Hu. Terrance Howard. You'll understand so much more

No the narrator misses the point. Its NOT complicated. Terrence is saying that the CONTEXT of counting is wrong WITHIN MULTIPLICATION. Multiplication IS NOT how many times you count the object to be multiplied. IT IS HOW MANY TIMES THAT OBJECT MULTIPLIES. Such as "this object multiplies itself 1 once." It's very simple, not complex. "This object multiplies itself 0 times." That's his insight. And that corresponds MATERIALY to how nature i.e. the physical world works. In which case, no object multiplied zero times would ever = nil. It's impossible. The consequence is that you have to utilize all kinds of retrofitting equations to make your formulas work where the concerned units are multiplied. So people who follow the rules are rewarded, and people - who at square one - the math didn't make sense in elementary school are punished. Another insight is that it's a huge waste of time to make such a formula as 1x1 when all you have to say is "1." There it's done. And "the object x 0 " is a complete waste of intelligence. So either its a conspiracy, useful for financial gain. Or, they just didn't understand what we now know about physical laws. Incredible!

first they dance with the devil and then they tell all....why?

7:26 "why does 1 multiplied by 1 equal 1?" Really?

He is not using language as intended. When we read 1x1, it means one thing, (ie an apple), one time, which remains one. 1 apple x 1 is 1, not 2. He wants multiplication to mean addition. 1 x 2 is one thing two times, so 1x2 = 2. It's amazing how inflated actor's egos can be. To actually think you're right when you are so wrong.

This man is adressing to ignorants, that's why he is getting attention. Internet have the effect to federate ignorants. We are entering the Age of Stupids.

Why breaking our head in things that do not matter... What we really should matter is if nature gives us: land+water+food.... Why not everyone has it? 🤔

1*1=1 so in one place put one apple =one apple.2*2=4in two place put 2aple =have 4apple its easy

The, theys know this but will teach the masses different.

Yeah because THE ONE DOES NOT EXIST. MATH IS AN ABSTRACTED IDEA USED FOR MEASUREMENT. The 1 in the equation just says that there is only one of what it is multiplied by- the one does not exist.

Is square root and squaring like adding and subtracting or multiplying and dividing?

@myPrzeslaw

17 күн бұрын

For positive numbers - yes.

What is 10 x 10 and 100 divided by 10?

Does a compounding interest calculator find answers using addition or multiplication?

@derekbidelman2442

3 ай бұрын

Multiplication

@mikkinikki1902

3 ай бұрын

@@derekbidelman2442That's what I was thinking, so that could be a problem when calculating the growth accurately...

What's 1×2= then?

What is 10 squared and what is the square root of 100?

How many grains of sand are on planet Earth ? Under every ocean on every beach and every desert ? When you have finished “counting” are you really finished counting ? For as you count more are being created and more are becoming rock…an eternal cycle cannot be “counted”

1+1=2 thats all we've learned, but 1+1 has never equaled 2

Olá por gentileza ativem as legendas para português

*Zero is NOT an amount, its a Transformer!* *Zero is NOT + - OR neutral, its an Act.* *So says Oz!*

In this arena. All my benefit are discovered within my own introspections for applicability in this place ....👂 🙏🏻If your contentment revolves around your understanding's. What's intelligence got to do with not understanding the hooks of understandings when you only use the tips of it? Like the sentence that's too gut bucket for you to grasp, your grasped by the short hairs of your sensitivities then go to unbridled animations or not. So what good is intelligence used part way and not on ourselves? I Look around with eyes I haven't used yet. There's always something about me about the (it) that's added into (it) by choice not involuntarily. Nine out of ten too much false is layered over top of the actuals? It's on every channel tuned into. What duck in a row of ducks never walks like ducks next to it ? A swan

A glitch in the matrix

May I ask a question? If math does not match with reality why the "universe" painted by artist should be? Think about...

A question , those who think he is Crazy. Do you Know what you dont know ? Perhaps not! Lil sheep Always thinking like the other sheeps . Big Brains try to enter This Code to get to the source of creation.But the Only one Knows That what we dont know. So just chill and Listen carefully .

He looks at the equasion in correctly as you need to look at the multiplication of zero as sets as one would with any multiplication question, so of we look at 1 as 1 set of 0 value then the answer is zero value and same applies to the multiplication of any set of a certain numbers let's say 5 so 5 sets of 0 or 5x0 will give us 5 sets of that value which are all 0 and that equasion works the same across the board with all numbers in sets of the value given to that number

$100*$100=$100 if $1*$1=$1

@user-LouisSypher

2 ай бұрын

Hahaha in 100 pockets put 100$how manu you have.100 ok extra you may give to me

@joeschmo9106

Ай бұрын

You’re not serious (I hope)

@1TruGODreality

Ай бұрын

@@joeschmo9106 well $1*$1 is $2 right? Can you see the break in the thought process?

so there are a few flaws in our math system. However most of it works. I've used math in the building trades with great success, scientist have used math also with great success, as others. Just because It's not 100% perfect or we just don't understand everything, what does that all mean to me?

@Patnoblefella

2 ай бұрын

Which brings me to the question: does a thing need to be logical or perfect as long as it works?

Like at what computers use with binary code 1 and 0s create everything…🤷🏽‍♂️

We live in world of dualaty. Where everything is relative. Ou we can have 2 diferente realities existing in the same time.

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

That is neither what duality nor relativity means at all

We can just hop on the next planet that is in the Goldie lock zone Like Venus.The planet of love.

I do not agree with the argument of 1 X1= something other than one. This is a math question. it is basically asking what is 1 of something. 15 one time is 15 (15 X 1). Carry it further. 2 X 1 is 2. 2 one time is still 2 not anything else. Hope you see the thought behind simple multiplication using a multiplier of 1.

@MsSoFruity

2 ай бұрын

In physics, actions don't simply stack up to result in another action of the same type. Instead, when two actions interact, they produce a reaction. Think of it this way: Action multiplied by Action equals Reaction (Action x Action = Reaction). This means that the outcome isn't just another action, but a reaction, which is a response to the combination of the two actions. Additionally, if you divide this reaction by one of the original actions (Reaction / Action), the result is still classified as a reaction. This division is essential to make sense of the interactions under the laws of physics. Remember, both multiplication and division are necessary to fully understand these concepts. Physics and mathematics synergistically ensure the accuracy of scientific principles through the use of laws, formulas, and logical reasoning. Mathematics provides the language and framework necessary to formulate and solve physical problems. Equations and formulas serve as the essential tools with which physicists describe relationships and predict the outcomes of physical interactions. For instance, consider the concept of "action" in physics, which can be quantified in units of energy or force. Mathematically, multiplying two "actions" together would not result in another "action" but rather a "reaction," possibly in units of energy squared or another relevant unit. This illustrates how physics and mathematics integrate to validate theories both theoretically and empirically, thus ensuring their accuracy. The ongoing interplay between mathematical rigor and experimental verification lays the cornerstone of scientific reliability and precision. Physical theories are empirically tested; predictions made based on mathematical calculations must hold true when tested experimentally. This supports the validity of the theories. For example, Newton’s second law, ( F=ma ) (force equals mass times acceleration), mathematically relates force, mass, and acceleration. Algebraic manipulations allow these equations to be rearranged and adjusted under specific rules, ensuring that all mathematical operations-addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division-are performed consistently and accurately. Physics uses these mathematical frameworks not only to describe but also to predict natural phenomena. The precision of these mathematical predictions is constantly tested through experiments and observations, maintaining the integrity and accuracy of scientific understandings. This rigorous testing confirms the robustness of the theoretical frameworks provided by physics and mathematics

I'm not good at math but i appreciate it because i see the world differently thanks to it but wtf is he on about? Psuedo math?

1x0 equals one

@7sons484

3 ай бұрын

no. A zero by itself is in fact zero.

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

Multiplication is the addition of A, B times. If A=1 and B=0, you add 1, 0 times. This equals 0. It seems you have forgotten second grade math so I will remind you. How do we check our answers when we multiply? Well, if A x B = C, then C/B must equal A or C/A must equal B. So tell me, does 1/0 = 1? No, no it does not. Does 1/1 equal 0? Also no.

Weird how we want progress but at the same time don’t want change or to be wrong?

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

What? We change all the time, otherwise how do we make scientific progress? You are making literally no sense. When we get new data and can prove it, scientific consensus follows. Until you can prove something, it is just an idea, and guess what? Most of those ideas are wrong.

@jordanthomas8980

2 ай бұрын

@@vicc6790 a lot of scientists are stuck on theories that they spent their lives working on and can’t take the reality that they are wrong and wasted their lives on nothing. Progress has been held back historically due to these types of intrenched scientists

Okay. That proves the existence of aliens.

I'm working toward a rebalance

What's so difficult here. If you say " one " one time it's always "one"! No loopholes in logic !😂😂😂

No 1 x 1 is 1, 1+1 is 2

@gkeith64

3 ай бұрын

So a dollar 💵 x a dollar 💵, is 1 dollar 💵... 😆 There's the issue

@gwaring

3 ай бұрын

@@gkeith64 No, a dollar 1 time is a dollar

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

@@gkeith64 you can't multiply currency by currency.

Wen pepoul say you ar dum you ar wise

interesting. I'm getting this but math always confused me. hehe. maybe i sensed something was b.s. guessing in Star Trek they figured this out.

@vicc6790

2 ай бұрын

I have some bad news for you

Thought this was a film actor?

In one regard in another perspective 1x1=1 sounds like how the animal kingdom reproduces namely ours for the most part. In which case 1x0 would then = 0. Though I love Howards thought line and don't disagree just playing devil's advocate.

I dont know who needs to read this but 2x1=4

@artsyguy209

2 ай бұрын

Anything x1 is actually supposed to be squared to itself

Nothing here!