I CHALLENGE A MATH RULE

8

8lyon

New member
Joined
Dec 11, 2021
Messages
2
I do not agree with the rule of (a negative times a negative is a positive.)
Maybe the rule we have made is wrong, maybe alot of times we are not getting the correct answers because the fundamentals are wrong. Just something to ponder. and here is my explanation of this thought.....

When multiplying, u are essentially "adding to" correct? So two negative things adding to eachother has to be another negative thing. In nature and math. Doesn't that make sense? If there is nothing positive it can't just become positive in nature.....

8lyon said:
I do not agree with the rule of (a negative times a negative is a positive.)
Maybe the rule we have made is wrong, maybe alot of times we are not getting the correct answers because the fundamentals are wrong. Just something to ponder. and here is my explanation of this thought.....

When multiplying, u are essentially "adding to" correct? So two negative things adding to eachother has to be another negative thing. In nature and math. Doesn't that make sense? If there is nothing positive it can't just become positive in nature.....
Click to expand...
It has to make sense in nature.. And all the explanations for why a negative times a negative is a positive that I have seen online seems like it's a twist of nature to make it work..
The law of relativity was discovered by sitting under an apple ? tree. Has to be relative to nature.....
 
8lyon said:
It has to make sense in nature.. And all the explanations for why a negative times a negative is a positive that I have seen online seems like it's a twist of nature to make it work..
The law of relativity was discovered by sitting under an apple ? tree. Has to be relative to nature.....
Click to expand...
Now that you challenged it and we plan to ignore it - what do you plan to do about it??
 
8lyon said:
It has to make sense in nature.. And all the explanations for why a negative times a negative is a positive that I have seen online seems like it's a twist of nature to make it work..
The law of relativity was discovered by sitting under an apple ? tree. Has to be relative to nature.....
Click to expand...
Have you considered that the force between charged particles is proportional the product of their charges? The forces (-1)(-1) and (1)(1) are both in the same direction. I'd say the rule fits nature pretty well.

And then there's the fact that calculations to get a spacecraft to Mars are based on standard rules for signs, and they get us there! Even Newton knew and followed them, and that let him figure out nature pretty well.

8lyon said:
When multiplying, u are essentially "adding to" correct? So two negative things adding to each other has to be another negative thing. In nature and math. Doesn't that make sense? If there is nothing positive it can't just become positive in nature.....
Click to expand...
If you add -1 to -1, you are multiplying by 2, not by a negative number. And, yes, a negative multiplied by a positive is still negative.

One way to think of multiplication by a negative number is that you are "undoing" a multiplication that many times. For example, if you think of multiplying 2 by 3 as adding 0+2+2+2 = 6, multiplying 2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-2-2-2 = -6 (undoing 3 additions), and multiplying -2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-(-2)-(-2)-(-2) = 6.

But really, it's something we prove algebraically using properties of operations. The only way to define multiplication with signed numbers that retains the associative and distributive properties is the way we do. Without the definition we use, algebra would break. There's no "maybe" there.
 
Subhotosh Khan said:
Now that you challenged it and we plan to ignore it - what do you plan to do about it??
Click to expand...
Umm then I'm talking the typical sheep that doesn't question anything....

Dr.Peterson said:
Have you considered that the force between charged particles is proportional the product of their charges? The forces (-1)(-1) and (1)(1) are both in the same direction. I'd say the rule fits nature pretty well.

And then there's the fact that calculations to get a spacecraft to Mars are based on standard rules for signs, and they get us there! Even Newton knew and followed them, and that let him figure out nature pretty well.


If you add -1 to -1, you are multiplying by 2, not by a negative number. And, yes, a negative multiplied by a positive is still negative.

One way to think of multiplication by a negative number is that you are "undoing" a multiplication that many times. For example, if you think of multiplying 2 by 3 as adding 0+2+2+2 = 6, multiplying 2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-2-2-2 = -6 (undoing 3 additions), and multiplying -2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-(-2)-(-2)-(-2) = 6.

But really, it's something we prove algebraically using properties of operations. The only way to define multiplication with signed numbers that retains the associative and distributive properties is the way we do. Without the definition we use, algebra would break. There's no "maybe" there.
Click to expand...
I get what ur saying. But math works, but sometimes we don't find out the answers and maybe there's something else wrong u know? And I that there are the basic rules of math, but it just doesn't make that much sense to me on a practical way of seeing it. If I have negative 5 bucks and my girl has negative 5, how in the world can that turn positive. I thought it has to be all relative.....

Dr.Peterson said:
Have you considered that the force between charged particles is proportional the product of their charges? The forces (-1)(-1) and (1)(1) are both in the same direction. I'd say the rule fits nature pretty well.

And then there's the fact that calculations to get a spacecraft to Mars are based on standard rules for signs, and they get us there! Even Newton knew and followed them, and that let him figure out nature pretty well.


If you add -1 to -1, you are multiplying by 2, not by a negative number. And, yes, a negative multiplied by a positive is still negative.

One way to think of multiplication by a negative number is that you are "undoing" a multiplication that many times. For example, if you think of multiplying 2 by 3 as adding 0+2+2+2 = 6, multiplying 2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-2-2-2 = -6 (undoing 3 additions), and multiplying -2 by -3 is like subtracting 0-(-2)-(-2)-(-2) = 6.

But really, it's something we prove algebraically using properties of operations. The only way to define multiplication with signed numbers that retains the associative and distributive properties is the way we do. Without the definition we use, algebra would break. There's no "maybe" there.
Click to expand...
Excuse my ignorance. But how is -1 and 1 going the same direction?? One is to the left, other is the right no??
 
8lyon said:
When multiplying, u are essentially "adding to" correct?
Click to expand...
No....

Multiplication and additions are two distinct DIFFERENT operations following different rules. Sometimes a problem can be solved by addition or by multiplication.

Like 3 × 2 = 3 + 3

That does not mean those operations are equivalent.

Do you know what are "irrational numbers"?

If you do, then,

Can you express

π × √2

as addition of real numbers?
 
8lyon said:
Excuse my ignorance. But how is -1 and 1 going the same direction?? One is to the left, other is the right no??
Click to expand...
Ignorant you are for sure .....

Dr. P was talking about forces in static electricity.

Two electrons, with charges -1 and -1 repel each other - away from a central position.

Two protons, with charges +1 and +1 repel each other - away from a central position.

motions in same direction......
 
8lyon said:
If I have negative 5 bucks and my girl has negative 5, how in the world can that turn positive.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about. If your girlfriend bank account is at negative $5 and your bank account has negative $5 how are you getting this to turn positive??? You two owe the bank a total of $10. (-$5) + (-$5) = -$10. There is no multiplication going on here!

If we lived in a society where -5 and -5 turned in a positive value, then I would be extremely rich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top