• joranvar@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Would it be a rabbit hole to try and find any merit in this solution when interpreting it as: “if x is in a superposition of 2 and -2, the x + 2 = x - 2 would be true in 1/4 of the observations”, or something like that?

    It is the closest thing to a “solution” that I can imagine, but doesn’t fit any laws that I know of or understand, and would probably break down on any scrutiny, but it feels like something is there.

    • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      x cant be both values at the same time, not under what most people consider to be math. Feel free to write your own logical system and see where that takes you, though.

      I think the only “solution” that works is addition/subtraction under mod 4 (or mod 2 I suppose) like another poster suggested. Then we’d have:

      X + 2 = x - 2

      X + 4 = x (Add 2 to both sides)

      X + 0 = x (4 = 0 mod 4)

      X = x (True for all x)

      • 0x4E4FOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        (True for all x)

        But not true for any rational number if you try it in the equation.

        Thus, this is not a solution. The equation is unsolvable with rational numbers.

        • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Correct, not solvable with rational numbers. I should have been more clear. When we’re doing arithmetic modulo x, it’s assumed to be with integers.

          To be clear, this is a solution only in Z_4 which is not what most people mean when they’re look for answers to algebra problems. And it would be a solution for all x in Z_4 (which are integers, see this page that I assume is a good summary)

          edit: this page might be better

          • 0x4E4FOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yes, that is correct, this is solvable in modular algebra… but, in that case, the tripple horizontal line equal sign should have been used, not the double horizontal line one, which of course indicates classic algebra.

            • urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Also true but I’m not sure how to do that on my phone so I gave up

              Maybe lemmy can do mathjax someday

              • 0x4E4FOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                I was talking about the person that posted the equation. They should have found a way if they wanted this thing solved, lol 😂.

    • 0x4E4FOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Don’t overthink it, it’s made to be unsolvable on purpose, just to test how much math your average Joe knows.

      • joranvar@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Haha I got that :) @[email protected] is right, I was halfheartedly looking for a logic system in which it could make sense. Still, I would have major issues with the first step as it is shown, but I am wondering about systems where, say, each x <- {..}, then what would be the set, and the probability of the correct solution.

        Something I need to be more awake for, and it may be easier to solve without resorting to powers and roots, haha.

        • joranvar@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Reply to self: really not that useful. That would be the same as just throwing all variables/coordinates of the solution in a set, forgetting their names and then filling them back in as some kind of madlibs experiment. And multiple solutions don’t grow with the exponent on x, that is just an odd/even thing. Don’t know shat I was thinking…

          • 0x4E4FOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I can tell you one thing, the equation makes perfect sense if x --> inf.