Most active commenters

    55 points lemper | 20 comments | | HN request time: 0.823s | source | bottom
    1. dvh ◴[] No.41914112[source]
    1+1=3 (for very large values of 1)
    replies(6): >>41914192 #>>41914254 #>>41914313 #>>41914375 #>>41914460 #>>41915170 #
    2. dist-epoch ◴[] No.41914192[source]
    For extreme values 1+1 can be as high as 5.
    replies(1): >>41915401 #
    3. youoy ◴[] No.41914202[source]
    Thanks for sharing! I like to look at this example inside the debate of if mathematics are invented or discovered.

    > That is how Whitehead and Russell did it in 1910. How would we do it today? A relation between S and T is defined as a subset of S × T and is therefore a set.

    > A huge amount of other machinery goes away in 2006, because of the unification of relations and sets.

    Relations are a very intuitive thing that I think most people would agree that are not the invention of one person. But the language to describe them and manipulate them mathematically is an invention that can have a dramatic effect on the way they are communicated.

    4. croes ◴[] No.41914254[source]
    And 1x1=2 according to Terrence Howard
    replies(1): >>41915470 #
    5. yohannparis ◴[] No.41914263[source]
    Thank you, it's an interesting read, because on my own, without the explanation this will have been over my head.
    6. bluGill ◴[] No.41914313[source]
    I know of 7 different ways to do 1+1 getting 5 different answers. I use most of them in my day to day work as a programmer. Most of the time 1+1=10 because as a programmer I work in binary.
    replies(1): >>41915329 #
    7. ◴[] No.41914375[source]
    8. nwnwhwje ◴[] No.41914460[source]
    1+1=10 if math were invented before fingers.

    Also:

    ١ + ٥ = ٦

    9. pvg ◴[] No.41914487[source]
    The mentioned size and density of Whitehead & Russel's Principia make the few dozen pages of Goedel's On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems one of the greatest "i ain't reading all that/i'm happy for u tho/or sorry that happened" mathematical shitposts of all time.
    replies(1): >>41915117 #
    10. awanderingmind ◴[] No.41914925[source]
    That was a lovely read, thank you. I particularly enjoyed the analogy between 'a poorly-written computer program' (i.e. one with a lot of duplication due to inadequate abstraction), and the importance of using the appropriate mathematical machinery to reduce the complexity/length of a proof. It brings the the Curry–Howard isomorphism to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspon...
    11. cubefox ◴[] No.41914942[source]
    Oh, so the λ in lambda calculus was just a poor man's circumflex.

    Unrelated, but why doesn't Hacker News have support for latex? And markdown, for that matter?

    replies(1): >>41915234 #
    12. oglop ◴[] No.41915117[source]
    Gödel had great respect for their work and was considered one of only a few people at the time to have read and understood the work. He wrote an entire paper later in life explaining he wouldn’t have come to his result without Principia because it showed him a base case to work from. Him and Russell would continue to meet and discuss logic well into the 50’s.
    13. somat ◴[] No.41915170[source]
    I would say 1 + 1 = 4 for very large values of one.

    You only need mid values of 1 for 1 + 1 to equal 3

    14. gabrielsroka ◴[] No.41915234[source]
    It supports https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc
    replies(1): >>41915316 #
    15. redbell ◴[] No.41915253[source]
    I often use the analogy "1+1=?" in debates with both friends and strangers, especially when discussing subjective topics like politics, religion, and geopolitical conflicts. It's a simple way to highlight how different perspectives can lead to vastly different conclusions.

    For instance, I frequently use the example "1+1=10" in binary to illustrate that, while our reasoning may seem fundamentally different, it's simply because we're starting from different premises, using distinct methods, and approaching the same problem from unique angles.

    16. yjftsjthsd-h ◴[] No.41915316{3}[source]
    Sure, but that's it's own not-quite-markdown thing, which is extra annoying because it's just close enough that people think it is markdown and do things like writing code blocks with ```. IMHO it'd be much better to just actually do markdown, or at least a strict subset.
    17. yjftsjthsd-h ◴[] No.41915329{3}[source]
    > Most of the time 1+1=10 because as a programmer I work in binary.

    Really low level embedded work? Most programming I know about effectively works in base 10 or sometimes hex.

    18. marcosdumay ◴[] No.41915401{3}[source]
    It's between 0 and 10, and can be approximated by either depending on the context...
    19. omeysalvi ◴[] No.41915470{3}[source]
    Actually, it is a metaphor for formulating a brand new branch of mathematics that fixes the identity principle and all the problems with the square root of two. But also, it is not a metaphor because show me any physical system where an action times an action does not equal a reaction.