• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The Sum of All Natural Numbers = -1/12

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I know the mathematician on the left looks hideous. But if anybody's watched the video, do you have an explanation for the move from step 1 to step 2?
 

LittleV

Just a note...
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
271
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w3
Essentially, you can do anything to an equation as long as you'd keep it balanced. You can 'prove' your own assumption(s) or use one(s) that has been proven. The aim is to continually get the numbers into a condensed enough form to properly solve. In S2: Adding the equation to itself has been shown as valid as well as the process of shifting it... since you are not changing any of the values. Any mathematical proof is valid unless a part of it can be disproved.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Essentially, you can do anything to an equation as long as you'd keep it balanced. You can 'prove' your own assumption(s) or use one(s) that has been proven. The aim is to continually get the numbers into a condensed enough form to properly solve. In S2: Adding the equation to itself has been shown as valid as well as the process of shifting it... since you are not changing any of the values. Any mathematical proof is valid unless a part of it can be disproved.

You say that shifting the lower series when adding them is "as valid as" balancing an equation. That's true because nothing has been added to the second series, it's just a null value at the beginning of the series. Adding nothing to a series doesn't change the series.

There is more to the proof, it has to do with convergent and divergent series. The idea is to cause the sum of the two series to converge, but the theory behind this is not included in the video.
 

LittleV

Just a note...
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
271
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w3
You say that shifting the lower series when adding them is "as valid as" balancing an equation. That's true because nothing has been added to the second series, it's just a null value at the beginning of the series. Adding nothing to a series doesn't change the series.

There is more to the proof, it has to do with convergent and divergent series. The idea is to cause the sum of the two series to converge, but the theory behind this is not included in the video.

I wouldn't compare the two; some notions are more likely to be disproved than others... balancing is not one that is in question. Yes... adding the series to itself and multiplying the 'S2' by two is keeping it balanced. When you'd shift the second row to add the numbers... this is a rule that many are taken aback by initially (so I thought I'd mention that). It's deemed as valid in itself because none of the individual values would be changed in doing so -- the top and bottom would always equal one another. There is more than just 'balancing' involved here... but it seems solid so far.
 
Top