Can anyone solve this?

>>8743740
Add a dark number and it's 3
1.9999...
-1/12

am I funny yet?

4-4+4-4+4-4+...

>>8743793
4-4+4-4...=s
4-(4-4+4-4...)=4-s
4-4+4-4+4...=4-s
2s=4
s=2

you are wrong
2-2+2-2...=1

>>8743740
It's 0.
If we apply binary values to on and off, and then think of a light switch, 1+1=0, as you have interacted with the placeholder twice, first changing it's status to 1(on), and then back to 0(off).

>>8743740
In any ring, it is either trivial or non-trivial, if the ring is trivial, then there is only one element, which is both the additive and multiplicative idenity 0 = 1, so therefore 1 + 1 = 1, as a ring is closed under addition.

If the ring is non-trivial, then the additive and multiplicative identity are not identical, for if it were, then 0 = 1, but then, 0 * a = 1 * a, and 0 * a = (0 + 0) * a = 0*a + 0*a, so 0*a = 0, but then 1 * a = a, so a = 0 for all a, meaning the ring is trivial, contradiction.

Therefore in any non-trivial ring, 1 and 0 are not identical. Therefore, 1 + 1 = 1 for the trivial ring, but 1 + 1 =/= 1 for any other ring, and in fact for any ring we can construct the value of 1 + 1 to be any element in the ring other than 1.

x = y.
Then x2 = xy.
Subtract the same thing from both sides:
x2 - y2 = xy - y2.
Dividing by (x-y), obtain
x + y = y.
Since x = y, we see that
2 y = y.
Thus 2 = 1, since we started with y nonzero.
Subtracting 1 from both sides,
1 = 0.

Therefore 1 + 1 = 0 + 0 = 0

>>8743740
>2

>>8744015
For anybody wondering:
(x - y) = 0 because x = y, therefore dividing by (x - y) fucks up the equation.

>go to this thread said if any common core was on here I was leaving
>leaves /sci/

>>8744237
Nice try brainlet. You'll understand math one day.

>>8744287
See you tomorrow anon.

File: 17270971_10211488856518354_410537763_n.jpg (80KB, 640x611px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 640x611px

>>8744339
>I'll have you know i have an iq of 129