>Next time, baby

File: 1406142951632.jpg (8KB, 300x162px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x162px

>>83621969

>>83621969
next time gadget

>>83621969
>micropenis

>>83621999
Have scientists figured out what he mint by this yet?

>>83623291
As far as I'm aware they've never been able to disprove it.

>>83621999
Hes offering anyone a million dollars if they can disprove him

http://www.bravotv.com/watch-what-happens-live-with-andy-cohen/season-14/episode-92/videos/terrence-howards-1-million-offer

>>83623511
I wish I had the money for the lawyers required to try to force him to pay up when I try to collect that prize. How do you "prove" something like that? It gets metaphysical in a hurry when you think about how to prove 1x1 isn't 2.

>>83623607
I'll do it pro bono if you have an airtight disproof.

>>83621999
he's right you know

>>83621999
If Howard starred in Iron Man 1 once and 1x1=2 then technically he starred in Iron Man 2 as well.

>>83623643
Even though he's a twit I liked him better than Don Cheadle. Cheadle is a way better actor but he came off as so serious.

Also are there two black dudes that look less alike than those two?
>he's black
>close enough

>>83623690
Cheadle is regular nig funny and a long way from an Eddie Murphy. Le black mathmatician looks like a ghetto Billy D.

File: 1243230540659470630.jpg (25KB, 636x330px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 636x330px

>>83621969

>>83625617
holy shit BLACKED posters absolutely btfo

>>83621969
This will never not be funny to me.

>>83621999
>based black science man
what can't NDT do??

File: 800px-Terrence_Howard.jpg (140KB, 800x1204px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 800x1204px

>In a 2015 interview with Rolling Stone, Howard explained that he had formulated his own language of logic, which he called Terryology, and which he was keeping secret until he had patented it. This logic language would be used to prove his contention that "1 x 1 = 2".

>>83626555
...do you just make posts to threads without reading them?

>>83623511
He can't be disproved because he's constructed his own system where this is true. Numbers are more or less a language and a language only 'works' when people all agree on definitions. E.g. you and I both agree that "tree" means "tree" and not "elephant." By constructing his statement in such a way where 1*1 = 2 then he creates a mathematical language for himself where this is indeed true. It might be retarded and completely useless for the purposes of maths and everyday engineering or shopping or what have you but being really fucking dumb is not the same thing as being wrong in this case.

File: 1481617455911.gif (949KB, 301x300px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 301x300px

>>83621999
Good thing this guy never really got into exponential functions, telling him that (x^0=1) would blow his fucking mind

>Hey Terrence, did you know that 1^1=1?
>Hey man, that's exactly the same as before where they tell you that 1*1=1, when really it's 1*1=2
>Ok Terrence, now what if I told you that 1^0=1 also?

>his face when

>>83621999
>>83623511
I hope numberphile looks at this problem and destroys him.

>>83627073
Math is universal. 1*1=1 is always true, no matter what kind of language.

>>83627518
This is not true.

>>83627518
Prove it.

>>83627518
Read up on some semiotics bruh

>>83627625
>semiotics
That's about representation of signs.

Doesn't change mathematical truths.

>>83627625
That's not the same thing. Don't be obtuse.

>>83623628
Mine's pretty airtight. His fundamental misunderstanding is in how multiplication functions. It's just shorthand addition.

1 + 1= 2 X 1, in other words, the expression "1 X 1" is equivalent to saying "one, one time."

1

"1 X 2" is equivalent to saying "one, two times,"

1 + 1

and so on.

The square root function is not a reversal of multiplication. It is specifically a reversal of any number times itself.

sqrt(4) is asking specifically, "what number times itself is equal to 4?" The answer is 2, as 2 X 2 = 4, just as sqrt(1) is equal to 1. His assertion that "we're told the sqrt of two is two" is utter nonsense, since that's not what we're told. It is mathematically determined to be approximately 1.41429.

In other words, the man is walking testament to the truth of the Dunning-Kruger effect - ignorance breeds overconfidence.

>>83627681
>>83627694
Mathematics is a language which depends on visual representations (i.e. signs) to construct meaning. Tell me how it's irrelevant when we're literally talking about maths as a 'natural' language.

File: xhxpu100qmhy.png (3MB, 2400x1349px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2400x1349px

>>83621999
Are we posting crazy celebrity quotes?

>>83627781
The funniest part is that this entire quote is to shit on the Iran nuclear deal that he just decided to extend

>>83627768
If you want to change the meaning of 1 to be sqrt(2) then yes 1*1=2.

Doesn't change that in that universe half of 2 times half of 2 is equal to our one. Representation doesn't change laws of physics.

>>83627768
Jesus christ, man.

One=1 or .
Uno=1 or .
Two=2 or ..
Dos=2 or ..

The symbols are irrelevant to the math. There is no way in the universe a civilization would get by without the same rules as ours regarding mathematics. If you go to fucking Europe and hash it out with someone what the answer to 1*1 is, you'll come to the same conclusion in two minutes because we have a universal understanding of the concept of the number 1. The symbols are irrelevant to the math.

>>83627768
Because one of something one time is always one, regardless of whether there is any creature on earth that understands that

>>83627845

A group of astronauts landed on an alien world and were amazed by how similar the terrain was to Earth. After exploring for a time, they came across 3 large boulders. One of the astronauts noticed movement behind the boulders and called out for the group to stop.

"Hello inhabitants of this world! We are peaceful explorers! Come from behind there and let us learn from each other!," said the lead astronaut.

From behind the boulders, three alien beings showed themselves and said, "Welcome! The ten of us were afraid you may be hostile, but it seems we were mistaken. We are glad to meet you."

"Ten?" asked the astronaut. "Are there more of your kind behind these rocks?"

"No," replied the alien. "It is only us ten here."

The astronauts were understandably confused. While the aliens are insisting their number is ten, the astronauts only count three aliens. Then one of the astronauts had a thought.

"Oh, I see!" he started. "I see you have only three fingers, so you must count in Base 3, where we have ten fingers and count in Base 10."

The aliens looked around in confusion. "No," said one, "we also count in Base 10." Then another alien asked, "What's three?"

File: Hmmm.png (65KB, 199x292px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 199x292px

>>83627993

>>83627993
A fun brain teaser but it proves nothing.

Especially since you don't explain it. There's no logical reason for them being able to speak english, so I'm guessing it's a mathematical syntax error in the flux matrix memory of the CTD(Communication and Transalation Device).

See how easy it is to make up bullshit? Still didn't change the logic of math.

File: dAu_xz7I.jpg (42KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 512x512px

>>83627993
The answer:
If you convert Base 2 into 10 then Base 10 will be 2.
The aliens count 3 of themselves and 2^3 is eight. You are forgetting, though, that since these aliens are green and have 3 fingers, it is most likely they aren't binocular. This means they have one eye.
So they can only count in halfs. 3*.5=1.5.
There are 3 aliens. That's 6 fingers. 6*1.5=9.6
9.6*
If the aliens are using base 10, and they each have one eye and they only count in halfs, then they must round up.
Therefore they see 10 of them.

tl;dr The answer is they don't use their thumbs.

>>83629230

It's a joke. In Base 3, you'd count 1 2 10 11 12 20 21 22 30, etc. They don't have a 3. Their 10 would be what we call 3 and our 10 would be what they call 31. The symbols used to represent numbers are variable. They would have the same principles in mathematics, just converted to Base 3.

I meant it to create doubt in that a way to represent numbers couldn't exist where 1x1=2. It's just 1 and 2 or x or = wouldn't mean what we think they mean. For argument's sake, say I've developed a mathematical language, that is a visual representation of mathematics, where everything is exactly the same except + means to multiply and x means to add. Now 1x1=2.

tl;dr You can't argue with idiots. Let Terrence Howards think he's smart.

>>83629405

Can't argue with your logic, but it's not a riddle.

File: 3522125.jpg (19KB, 400x349px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 400x349px

>>83629405

No one said they were green.

>>83629644

1 2 10 11 12 20 21 22 100 101 102 110

im an idiot lol

File: KMzYj.png (22KB, 164x226px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 164x226px

>>83629644
>>83629405

>>83629644
>>83629727
Ok, I thought that you were trying to make a whole different point with the riddle and didn't consider this part, wich was also the point I was trying to make.

>>83627073
>He can't be disproved because he's constructed his own system where this is true.
And we have a system where is not true, and something else is true. Problem is, HIS system is as arbitrary as ours.

It's like asking "Why are we using this simbol * and not this one % to represent the same thing?" If he have a remotely sligthly better reason as to why it will fit better in the nature of our universe, even if it forces every person on the planet unlearn something, it should be done. Pluto is no longer a planet.

Refusing to change because it's easier to leave everything the way it is, is the real stupidity.

>>83630144
>Problem is, HIS system is as arbitrary as ours.
No it isn't. You're talking about symbols and what they represent instead of fundamental truths. We know what the number one represents, but we didn't always have the number "1," or "I." Same with zero, however the Mayans had a concept of what zero is and chose to represent it in a big fancy O. They had a concept of the number one and represented it as a single dot. These are things civilizations come across, truths in math. It does not matter how you represent them, sentient beings come to the conclusion that, no matter what the symbol is, 1=1. What Howard is doing goes COMPLETELY against one of these truths, that 1 and two of itself is two. Meanwhile you're talking symbols.

>>83621969
>I'LL BEEEE-EEE
>BULLEEEEEEET PROOOOOOOOOF

>>83630234

numbers are symbols though

>>83630271
Yes, and?

>>83627781
>it's a /leftypol/ post again
ugh

File: tmp_15063-who-would-win-20min-flat-earth-3000-nasa-scientists-youtube-20061814619200195.png (81KB, 500x351px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 500x351px

It's scary how this thread actually devolved into an argument that maybe 1*1 could equal 2. At what point do we just acknowledge that humans as a species aren't that bright? How long did it take us to invent the wheel? We're barely past chimps.

>>83630234
Then maybe he only wants to replace our symbols as to all have a cumulative meaning.
Our numbers are
1
2
3
4


Meanwhile, in Terrance numbers,
1 (equals our 0,9)
1 (equals our 1)
2 (equals our 2)
1 (equals our 2,2)
3 (equals our 3)
4 (equals our 4)

Maybe Terrence wants the problematic, the useless and unnatural 2nd 1 (T1(2)) removed from school.
That way it'll be T1(1)*T1(3)=2.
Also, in T numbers, 1*2= 1,8 and 1*2 =4,4

Why do threads about this dumbfuck always get so many replies?

Does he have a point or is everyone being retarded?

>>83630468

It's funny.

>>83630468
yes

>>83625617
Myth breaker

>>83627518
No. You can easily construct a space in which the operation 1x1 equals 2. Math is not universal. It is axiomatic. Terry has constructed his own logical system in which 1x1=2 apparently based on the assertion that since 2x2=4 -> 1x1=2. Which is just hilarious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI1CuTbxDhI

>>83623690
Ike Perlmutter literally said that when he recasted them.

>In September 2015, Perlmutter stopped overseeing the development of Marvel Studios. Disney felt the studio head, Kevin Feige, should report directly to the chief of Disney Studios, Alan Horn, so all cinematic properties of Disney, including Pixar and Lucasfilm, were under one management structure. The restructuring was allegedly due to Feige's "frustration" of working with Perlmutter as well as some alleged controversial comments and actions by Perlmutter, such as replacing the casting of Terrence Howard as James Rhodes with Don Cheadle because black people "look the same."[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Perlmutter#Marvel

File: steiner math.jpg (20KB, 490x356px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 490x356px

>>83621999
Give Steiner a crack at this

>>83626555
you can't patent math

>>83631481
those guys sound STOOOOOOOOOOOONED

File: 1496394030259.png (28KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 633x758px

>>83631688
Technically you can nowadays.