One Plus One Equals Two (2006)

1+1=3 (for very large values of 1)

For extreme values 1+1 can be as high as 5.

And 1x1=2 according to Terrence Howard

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.

1+1=10 if math were invented before fingers.

Also:

١ + ٥ = ٦

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

> 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.

It's between 0 and 10, and can be approximated by either depending on the context...

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.

It's actually super easy to form a "brand new branch of mathematics". Just start with some definitions and run with them. Although you'll almost certainly end up with something inconsistent. And if you don't, it'll almost certainly be not useful. And if it is useful, it'll almost certainly turn out to be the exact same math just wearing a costume.

There are no problems with the square root of two.

> show me any physical system where an action times an action does not equal a reaction.

Show me any gazzbok where a thrushbloom minus a grimblegork does not equal a fistelblush. Haha, you can't do it, can you!? I WIN!

That is to say: you're using silly made up definitions of "action" and "times" here.

> show me any physical system where an action times an action does not equal a reaction

Not quite sure what an action times an action is, but how about rotating a 2d shape 180 degrees? Do that twice and it's the same as not rotating it at all.

You mean two reactions. Otherwise 1x1 would be 1

Are you saying you actually buy into the Terrence Howard school of mathematics? For serious?

Embedded work - not very low level, but I need to decode a lot of CAN network packets where the individual bits matter. Most of them time I use a hex representation, but that is because hex makes it really easy to figure out the binary going on underneath. Even when I'm doing normal math though it is important to remember that it is binary under it all and so overflow happens at numbers that make sense in binary terms.