Remix.run Logo
▲ goodmythical a day ago

Can you not? 9+(9(1/3)) [adding nine to itself a third of a time] is nine plus one third of nine {or nine divided by three} which is one of the three in three times three that equals nine which is three therefore 9+(9(1/3))=11 because 9+3=11

▲mojomark 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

By dividing by 3 you are introducing a scaler into the operation.

Multiplication also flips signs (direction). That's why a negative * negative = positive, whereas a negative + negative = negative. The addition operator does not flip direction.

Multiplication is not generally the same as multiple addition operations. However, it has the same result for positive whole numbers.

I am not writing this to flippant. I'm a 40-something year old engineer and I litterally thought the same thing until a year ago-ish. I was trying to build a function (I can't recall what exactly) for a project and I said, well instead of multiplying these terms (which wasn't efficient for what I was doing or something), I'll just cycle through and add the terms X-number of times. ChatGPT said "uh, no, that's not the same thing," to which I said NFW and proceeded down a deep rabbit hole on the difference. I'm glad I did because I also now have a much better intuition for imaginary numbers, which I was severely lacking before.

▲red369 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

:)

I like it when people who are clearly smart do things like this! Makes me feel better.

Reminds me of this story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5663709

▲srean 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's Grothendieck multiplication.

▲alpaca128 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

9+3=12, but otherwise I agree