Previous Page | Next Page | Contribute
If you are a math enthusiast or aficionado, have you ever encountered mathematical foolish proofs like
Notes:
- Almost all mathematical proofs here are foolish, unless explicitly noted as valid.
- Plain-text LaTeX
.tex
code is insrc/
. - Best to view foolmath on GitHub.com using Firefox web browser on any devices,
GitHub
app on mobile devices orGitHub.io
doesn't render LaTeX or MathJax.GitHub.com
itself is also updated every now and then. Sometimes it appears to have rendered incorrectly on other web browsers. - There are many pages in the repository. Other than
README.md
in the root directory of the repository,GitHub
will show the left pane displaying the source tree when viewing the other files. For the best viewing experience, you can simply close such left pane, in order to see the contents in full screen.
Proofs speak louder than words. Let's start!
- Page 1 |view it|
- Ramanujan summation |view it|
- Ramanujan alternative 1 |view it|
- Ramanujan alternative 2 |view it|
- Summing the power of two |view it|
- Summing all natural odd numbers |view it|
- Summing all natural even numbers |view it|
- Why is
$0=1$ ? |view it| - Why is
$1=2$ ? |view it| - Let's see a little higher numbers,
$4=5$ . |view it| - Are all intergers equal? |view it|
- Why is
$2+5=8$ ? |view it| - Just another freak,
$9=17$ . |view it| - Very silly solutions to find
$\frac{0}{0}$ . |view it| - Who said
$i$ is imaginary, why is$i=1$ then? |view it| - Let's talk more about
$i$ . |view it| -
$i=\pm1$ , isn't it? |view it| -
$i=0$ , probably |view it| - How much is
$\infty$ ? |view it| - How much is
$0.\infty$ ? |view it| - Is
$0$ an even number? |view it| - Solve
$x$ for$x+2=x$ . |view it| -
$e^{i\pi}=$ ?, also known as Euler's Identity |view it| -
$e^x=1$ , no matter what$x$ maybe. |view it| - How much is
$\pi$ ? |view it| - How much is
$i^i$ ? |view it| - How much is
$\sqrt[^i]{i}$ ? |view it| - Who said
$n^0=1$ ? |view it| - Why is
$\frac{d}{dx}e^x=e^x$ ? |view it| - Why is multiplying factor converting the power
$1\phi$ to$3\phi$ is$\sqrt{3}$ ? |view it| - Magic numbers |view it|
- Vortex math |view it|
- A property of prime numbers |view it|
- Relation between
$e$ and$\pi$ a.k.a. Gaussian integral |view it| - Golden ratio from Fibonacci sequence |view it|
- Isn't it
$\infty=\Phi$ ? |view it| - How much is
$1^i$ ? |view it| - How much is
$\sqrt[^i]{1}$ ? |view it| - Whether
$e=1$ or$\pi=0$ |view it| - How much is
$e^i$ ? |view it| - Simple continued fraction expansion of
$\pi$ |view it| -
$\sqrt{-\ln{(-1)}\ln{(-1)}}=\pi$ , how? |view it| - How is
$6$ afraid of$7$ ? It ain't and will never be. |view it|
- Page 2 |view it|
- The first equation we learnt in kindergartens |view it|
- Production of all multiple of
$2$ |view it| - Production of all natural odd numbers |view it|
- Production of all natural numbers |view it|
- Production of all natural even numbers |view it|
- Infinite numbers of primes |view it|
- Magic squares |view it|
- Why is
$\sqrt{2}$ irrational? |view it| - How do programmers increase a variable? |view it|
-
$\frac{dx}{dx}=0$ , really? |view it| -
$\pi=-\pi$ , what? |view it| -
$2=3$ , isn't it absurd? |view it| - What if
$3=0$ ? |view it| - Do you know that
$1=-1$ ? |view it| - Oh what,
$\pm2\pi=0$ ? |view it| - Is
$1$ defined in mathematics? |view it| - How much is
$e$ ? |view it| - How much is
$\frac{a}{0}$ ? |view it| -
$\pi$ can be any real numbers. |view it| -
$\infty=0$ , the universe is empty. |view it| -
$\pi=e$ , why do engineers say so? |view it| - Freak again,
$i=\infty$ |view it| - Whether
$i$ or$\pi$ is$0$ . |view it| - Infinite nested radical |view it|
- Page 3 |view it|
- Support foolmath |here|
We firstly start from the well-known Ramanujan Summation, which is known to most mathematicians.
source code: rama_sum.tex | Go to top | TOC
There are still a few Ramanujan alternatives.
source code: rama_alt_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hold on! There is still another alternative.
source code: rama_alt_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
Oops, was Ramanujan wrong?
source code: sum_power_of_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
Negative! once again.
source code: sum_of_odd.tex | Go to top | TOC
Wow! this time the summation is positive.
source code: sum_of_even_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Why is it negative again, who know? Probably something wrong.
Try the next proof, which is simpler.
source code: sum_of_even_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Same result, do you start to believe?
Here come the most foolish proof!
source code: 0eq1_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
What about the second most foolish proof?
source code: 0eq1_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Is there any proof looking more advanced than these?
source code: 0eq1_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
Can you find an error? Hmm, binary no longer exists.
Here, the proof I learnt in junior high school.
source code: 1eq2_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Nah, there is another proof in high school using trigonometry.
source code: 1eq2_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Yet, there is another proof using calculus.
source code: 1eq2_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
Do you find any clues?
source code: 4eq5_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hey, what? How come,
Wait, there are something more.
source code: all_int_eq.tex | Go to top | TOC
It is very articulate, indeed.
There is one more simple equation. Have a look.
source code: 2plus5eq8_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
There is one more, it is tricky.
source code: 9eq17_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Square of negative numbers really does the trick.
Who said
source code: 0by0_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: 0by0_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Bruh, how can you divide
source code: ieq1_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: inv_i_valid.tex | Go to top | TOC
Nah, there is another
source code: inv_i_fool.tex | Go to top | TOC
Which one will you believe?
source code: i_eq-i.tex | Go to top | TOC
It is exactly imaginary.
source code: i_eq_pm1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hold on!
source code: i0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Whatever it is, it is not imaginary anyway.
source code: infty_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hold on,
source code: infty_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Here,
source code: infty_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
Well,
source code: 0infty.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hmm, I will never believe.
This proof is believed to be valid.
source code: 0_even.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: x+2eqx.tex | Go to top | TOC
A silly equation always has the solution.
Now, have a look at the valid proof of Euler's identity.
source code: euler.tex | Go to top | TOC
Euler's identity shall be used in the other proofs (whether valid or foolish).
Let's see the first foolish proofs using Euler's identity.
source code: ex_eq_1_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Q: Bruh, how can you divide by
A: Hold on, there is another neater proof.
source code: ex_eq_1_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Now, let's see the value of
source code: pi_eq_0_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
If you don't believe, yet there are another solutions.
source code: pi_eq_0_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: pi_eq_0_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: pi_eq_0_3.tex | Go to top | TOC
Hold on,
source code: pi_eq_1_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Yet, there are another silly solutions.
source code: pi_eq_3_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Oops! engineers also say that!
source code: pi_eq_3_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
We have seen several foolish proofs so far, let's see valid proofs.
source code: i_power_i.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: i_root_i.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: nto0neq1.tex | Go to top | TOC
It is still a constant, but not 1
, not even an integer.
It is even an irrational and transcendental number.
Next, let's see valid proofs.
There are many solutions out there, let's have a look.
source code: d_e_power_x_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: d_e_power_x_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: d_e_power_x_2.tex | Go to top | TOC
source code: d_e_power_x_3.tex | Go to top | TOC
Four proofs should suffice.
You may notice that the electrical power
This proof is kinda engineering, so
In 0
and the amplitude of live line is always a constant. But in
A full circle covers the angle of
source code: 3p_power.tex | Go to top | TOC
So now you know that the power
Let's see some weirdness of mathematics.
The following math properties are not the proofs, but they are the demonstrations showing the valid weirdness of mathematics.
Have you ever know a magic number 9
? Whatever multiplying with 9
will result number of digits. We keep adding each digit until the final result is one digit. The final result is always 9
for examples ...
5 * 9 = 45
,
then 4 + 5 = 9
or
135686 * 9 = 1221174
then 1 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 7 + 4 = 18
,
and then 1 + 8 = 9
.
All explaination above is on base 10
. However this concept also applies to all bases. The magic number for each base is base - 1
. This is a valid weirdness.
base 10: magic number = 10 - 1 = 9
1 * 9 = 9
2 * 9 = 18 --> 1 + 8 = 9
3 * 9 = 27 --> 2 + 7 = 9
4 * 9 = 36 --> 3 + 6 = 9
5 * 9 = 45 --> 4 + 5 = 9
6 * 9 = 54 --> 5 + 4 = 9
7 * 9 = 63 --> 6 + 3 = 9
8 * 9 = 72 --> 7 + 2 = 9
9 * 9 = 81 --> 8 + 1 = 9
The final result will always be 9.
base 8: magic number = 010 - 01 = 07
01 * 07 = 07
02 * 07 = 016 --> 01 + 06 = 07
03 * 07 = 025 --> 02 + 05 = 07
04 * 07 = 034 --> 03 + 04 = 07
05 * 07 = 043 --> 04 + 03 = 07
06 * 07 = 052 --> 05 + 02 = 07
07 * 07 = 061 --> 06 + 01 = 07
The final result will always be 07.
base 16: magic number = 0x10 - 0x1 = 0xf
0x1 * 0xf = 0xf
0x2 * 0xf = 0x1e --> 0x1 + 0xe = 0xf
0x3 * 0xf = 0x2d --> 0x2 + 0xd = 0xf
0x4 * 0xf = 0x3c --> 0x3 + 0xc = 0xf
0x5 * 0xf = 0x4b --> 0x4 + 0xb = 0xf
0x6 * 0xf = 0x5a --> 0x5 + 0xa = 0xf
0x7 * 0xf = 0x69 --> 0x6 + 0x9 = 0xf
0x8 * 0xf = 0x78 --> 0x7 + 0x8 = 0xf
0x9 * 0xf = 0x87 --> 0x8 + 0x7 = 0xf
0xa * 0xf = 0x96 --> 0x9 + 0x6 = 0xf
0xb * 0xf = 0xa5 --> 0xa + 0x5 = 0xf
0xc * 0xf = 0xb4 --> 0xb + 0x4 = 0xf
0xd * 0xf = 0xc3 --> 0xc + 0x3 = 0xf
0xe * 0xf = 0xd2 --> 0xd + 0x2 = 0xf
0xf * 0xf = 0xe1 --> 0xe + 0x1 = 0xf
The final result will always be 0xf.
You can try different bases. The results will be the same.
Consider the following series, each number is the power of 2
. This is a valid math property.
source code: vortex.tex | Go to top | TOC
Do you feel that math is so strange?
The square of a prime number other than 2
or 3
is always a multiple of 24 pluses 1
. Let's see.
source code: prime_0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Primes (other than 2
and 3
) can only have remainders of 1
or 5
when they are divided by 6
. If the remainder was 0
, 2
or 4
it would be even, and if it was 3
, it would be divisible by 3
.
source code: prime_1.tex | Go to top | TOC
The proof for the case that p
has a remainder of 5
is almost the same, just start with p = 6n - 1
instead of 6n + 1
.
This valid proof is called Gaussian intergral. It demonstrates the relation between
source code: e_pi_relation.tex | Go to top | TOC
Gaussian integral is one of many relations between
source code: golden_fib.tex | Go to top | TOC
Well, we have been talking about valid proofs for long.
Let's start freaks again.
source code: infty_fibo.tex | Go to top | TOC
Now you can see,
source code: 1poweri.tex | Go to top | TOC
Oops, a unit real number
raises a unit imaginary number
is real. The number is so small 0.001867...
. And it is not 1
, like what being said by WolframAlpha. Why, who know?
Let's see more about a unit real number
and a unit imaginary number
.
source code: sqrti1.tex | Go to top | TOC
You can see a unit imaginary root
of a unit real number
is real and indeed a big real. It is as big as 535.5
. Once again, it is not 1
, why does WolframAlpha say so?
source code: e1pi0.tex | Go to top | TOC
Oops, whether
source code: etoi.tex | Go to top | TOC
In our early primary school, we were taught that 22/7
. But actually
3, 7, 15, 1, 292, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 14, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1, 84, 2, 1, 1, 15, 3, 13, 1, 4, 2, 6, 6, 99, 1, 2, 2, 6, 3, 5, 1, 1, 6, 8, 1, 7, 1, 2, 3, 7, 1, 2, 1, 1, 12, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 8, 1, 1, 2, 1, 6, 1, 1, 5, 2, 2, 3, 1, 2, 4, 4, 16, 1, 161, 45, 1, 22, 1, 2, 2, 1, 4, 1, 2, 24, 1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 2, 1, ...
(valid
We might start with the first two terms.
source code: pi_exp_2_terms.tex | Go to top | TOC
Or we might want higher accuracy and precision. Let's take three terms.
source code: pi_exp_3_terms.tex | Go to top | TOC
And we go a little further, Let's take five terms.
source code: pi_exp_5_terms.tex | Go to top | TOC
In terms of complex numbers, this proof is believed to be valid.
source code: ln-1.tex | Go to top | TOC
Well, WolframAlpha confirms that!
There was a joke from our childhood, why
Nah, 6 ain't afraid of 7, here's the proof. I can't believe, I simply thought about this joke, then discovered this foolish proof within a few hours. ;-p
source code: 6_not_afraid_7.tex | Go to top | TOC
So,
I keep adding these kinds of freaks or topics, which are considered interesting, no matter what they are foolish or valid math. foolmath is a passion project I do under my curiosity at my retirement. Your support will motivate me to curate and expand this repository with even more fascinating content, and especially it can help me pay the bills.
If you find foolmath entertaining, educational, or you simply enjoy its content, or just feeling generous, please consider buy me a coffee. I will highly appreciate and will be very grateful.
Note: All contributions are voluntary and not required to access or use the content. See LICENSE.
Go to top | TOC | Previous Page | Next Page