PORTSMOUTHPOINT

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Mathematical Fallacies

Posted on 4:04 PM by Unknown
by Sampad Sengupta


A fallacy is a mistaken belief, one based on unsound argument. It may be an idea that a lot of people think is true but is in fact false. Now, in mathematics, a proof is an argument, a deductive argument for a mathematical statement.  It may use statements which are already established, i.e. theorems, and logic; a proof can be made by mathematical induction, contradiction, exhaustion, and many other ways.  However, even some arguments like these may turn out to be fallacies.  There are certain so-called mathematical proofs which may apparently show some unexpected statements to be true by cleverly concealing areas in the proof, but these statements are indeed false.

Here are a few examples of such fallacies and the truth behind each one of them:

1)      Proof of 2=1:

Let a and b be equal non-zero quantities,
a = b
Multiplying through by a
a2= ab
Subtracting  b2from both sides
a2- b2 = ab-b2
Factorising the equation
(a-b)(a+b) = b(a-b)
Dividing out (a – b)
a+b = b
Since a=b
b+b = b
2b = b
Dividing both sides by b
2 = 1

At first glance this looks quite remarkable, but if you look closely, you can spot the error. The proof starts off soundly, but then the mistake creeps in when we divide out by (a-b). Since a and b are both equal, (a-b) is zero. Since division by zero is undefined, the argument is invalid.  If it were valid, then it would be possible to prove any number to be equal to any other number, but it isn’t.

2)      Proof of 0=2:

0 = 1-1
Since square of 1 = 1
0 = 1-12
0 = 1 - √12
Adding and subtracting 4 under square root as they will cancel each other out
0 = 1 - √12 – 4 + 4
Since (12 – 4 + 4) = (1 – 2)2
0 = 1 - √(1-2)2
We then remove the square root and multiply out the brackets
0 = 1 - (1 – 2)
0 = 1 – 1 + 2
The two 1s cancel out leaving
0 = 2

Once again, an equation like this cannot be true. The problem lies when we are taking the square root of 12.  Taking square roots requires the use of the double plus-or-minus sign + (or absolute values).  In this case, when we take the square root of 12, the results should be both +1 and –1. Thus, this proof is also invalid.

3)      Proof of  0=2:  (this time by a different method)

Let us take an equation which we know to be true,
cos2 x = 1 – sin2 x
Taking the square root of both sides
cos x = (1 – sin2 x)1/2
Adding 1 to both sides
1 + cos x = 1 + (1 – sin2 x)1/2
By evaluating this when x = 1800
1 – 1 = 1 + (1 – 0)1/2
Thus showing
0 = 2

In equations like these, the fallacy may be concealed effectively in notation.  Similar to the previous one, the error in each of these examples fundamentally lies in the fact that any equation of the form x2 = a2has two solutions:  +a, provided a is not equal to 0.
In this example, only when the square root of cos x is positive is the equation valid, but when x is set to 1800, the proof is invalid.

4)      Proof of 1=2 using complex numbers and the imaginary unit ( i = √-1 ):

- (1/1) = - (1/1)
- 1/1 = 1/-1
Square root both sides
√-1/1 = √1/-1
Simplifying
√-1 / √1 = √1 / √-1
Converting √-1 to imaginary number i
i / 1 = 1 / i
Multiplying both sides by ½
i / 2 = 1 / (2i)
Adding 3/(2i)to both sides
i/2 + 3/(2i) = 1/(2i) + 3/(2i)
Multiplying both sides by i
i(i/2 + 3/(2i)) =i(1/(2i) + 3/(2i))
Simplifying
(i2)/2 + (3i)/2i = i/(2i) + (3i)/2i
Converting i2 term to -1 and adding fractions
(-1)/2 + 3/2 = 1/2 + 3/2
1 = 2

This so-called proof makes use of complex numbers, thus making it hard to find the error.  The fallacy here lies in the third step.  In simplifying from step two to three, we try to make two things equal that are not.  We have √(-1/1) = √(1/-1) in step two.  The left-hand side (LHS) does simplify to √(-1)/√(1), which is the LHS in step three.  The right-hand side (RHS) in step two √(1/-1) does not simplify to √(1)/√(-1), which is what we see as the RHS in step three.  In fact, it is -√(1)/√(-1).   A more careful examination of negative numbers will help explain the fallacy clearly.  The product of (-1)(-1) is one. So √(-1*-1) = √(1) = 1. Yet √(-1)√(-1) = i*i = i2= -1.  So these two products are not the same.  Hence the rule of √(ab) = √(a)√(b) holds true as a rule when a and b are both positive numbers.  For negative and complex numbers, however, this rule fails to hold true.


These were only a few examples of fallacies in mathematics, all of which are achieved by carefully concealing sections of the proof which are not true.  So the next time someone comes up to you and shows you a proof which seems correct but cannot be, you know what to look out for. 




Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in Blog Exclusive, Science and Tech | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Recipe: Fifteens
     by Patrick McGuiggan The definitive Northern Ireland traybake is the ‘Fifteen’. They are so delicious I assumed that they would be fairly ...
  • 'Porphyria's Lover': A Feminist Reading
    Josh Rampton offers a Feminist reading of Robert Browning's poem 'Porphyria's Lover'. This article was originally published ...
  • Favourite Films: Skyfall
    by Tom Harper Upon my recent exploration of the latest movie archives I was stopped dead in my tracks by Disney and Pixar’s recent announcem...
  • Interview: with Melissa Smith of ‘The Exonerated’
    by Taylor Richardson Melissa Smith , who plays a main role in the school’s production of The Exonerated , answers five questions surroundi...
  • Why Are We So Fascinated By The Gothic?
    Lucy Cole The Nightmare by John Henry Fuseli, 1781 (wiki commons) Since its humble beginnings in 1764, with Horace Walpole’s The Castle of O...
  • Portsmouth Point Poetry – War and Humanity in 'The Iliad'
    by George Laver  Priam (left) pleads with Achilles (centre) for the return of the body of his son, Hector (below). (source: bc.edu)    ...
  • Is Texting Killing The English Language?
    In this  TED talk , linguist John McWhorter analyses the linguistics of texting: " Texting properly isn’t writing at all — it’s actual...
  • Hackers: Pain Relief
    by Gregory Walton-Green , with an introduction by Benjamin Schofield Introduction Prompted by a writing exercise in Hackers, here Gregory ...
  • Is Lack of Sleep a Problem for PGS Pupils?
    by Hattie Gould and Annie Materna (image source: uratexblog.com) Sleep deprivation is a continual problem for teenagers and can be the caus...
  • Why The US Supreme Court Has Made The Right Decision Regarding Gene Patenting
    by Tim Bustin (source: biopoliticaltimes.org) On Thursday, the US Supreme Court ruled that human genes may not be patented, as “a naturally ...

Categories

  • Art and Literature (72)
  • Blog Exclusive (466)
  • Creative Writing (36)
  • Current Affairs (55)
  • Economics (12)
  • Film and Drama (62)
  • Food (12)
  • From Parents (1)
  • From Teachers (54)
  • Hackers (12)
  • History (21)
  • Language (17)
  • MUN (1)
  • Music (58)
  • Personal (45)
  • Philosophy and Religion (20)
  • Photography (66)
  • Psychology (13)
  • Science and Tech (41)
  • Sport (58)
  • Travel (14)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (346)
    • ▼  September (21)
      • Hollister : A Short Play
      • Is Bale the Real Deal?
      • Mathematical Fallacies
      • RN/RAF Summer Camp 2013
      • Review: "I Wanna Be Yours"
      • The Swedish: T/S Gunilla
      • Seafront at Sunset
      • A Response To "Why Abortion Should Not Remain Legal"
      • Why Abortion Should Not Remain Legal
      • In Defence of Warhammer (40k)
      • You’re Not Too Cool For Summer School
      • A Warning To Voters Down Under...
      • My 5 Sports-People of the Summer
      • Squirrel in the Classroom
      • Poem: By The Sea: A War’s Tale
      • Photographs: 5 Summer Beaches
      • PGS at the International Theatre Festival, Avignon
      • Photography: The Belt of Venus
      • Favourite Album: 'OK Computer' by Radiohead
      • Photograph: On Milton Common III
      • Poem for Sunday: Pevensey Beach
    • ►  August (20)
    • ►  July (43)
    • ►  June (52)
    • ►  May (42)
    • ►  April (41)
    • ►  March (42)
    • ►  February (38)
    • ►  January (47)
  • ►  2012 (153)
    • ►  December (41)
    • ►  November (48)
    • ►  October (45)
    • ►  September (19)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile