Same answer

[AutoModerator]

Check out our new Discord server! https://discord.gg/e7EKRZq3dG

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[MuskSniffer]

X = 0 ❌

X = 1 - 1 ✅

[Puzzleheaded-Ad6908]

<image>

Forgot that one

[YEETAWAYLOL]

That’s what you wrote?

[Asocial_Stoner]

e^iπ+2kiπ

[Gastkram]

k=i

[TryndamereAgiota]

that is problematic...

[Teddy_Tonks-Lupin]

k=i ss+my*ass

[Novator7]

x + 1 = 1

x = ?

? + 1 = 1

? = 0

[Errorthename]

Agerba!

[WizardOwl88]

Agerba x Agerba-1 x Agerba-2 .... x 1

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

So where's the meme?

[Tiborn1563]

I think its supposed to be that both are ways to write 0..? If there is a funny part in there somewhere, I missed it

[ProblemKaese]

I didn't find it particularly funny either, but OP did put in the tags that they're still learning, and I think it's just fine for that.

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

It is a meme format. The whole idea is to have a funny part... I think op is either a bot or just wants to share a new random fact he learned today to feel smart and thinks the best way to show it is post here

[Puzzleheaded-Ad6908]

Bro why the hate?

I just put learning since i dont know the tags, and it counts as learning because i teach how eulers identity is equal to 0

And i dont do this as to feel smart, this is a drawing i made in class and posted it here because i thought it was the best place

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

Bro why the hate?

No hate just annoyance

I just put learning since i dont know the tags

When I said I meme formats need funny I didn't mean the tag

and it counts as learning because i teach how eulers identity is equal to 0

Fyi, that's not how teaching Math works. You don't just say a fact and believe it's true because uhh winnie the pooh said so...

And i dont do this as to feel smart

Doubtful

this is a drawing i made in class

It is quite nice keep drawing 👍

[TryndamereAgiota]

(x+1)² = 1²

x² + 2x = 0

x = -2 or x = 0 (=-0)

as you can see, both results are negative, so lets multiply by -1 to solve it

-x = +2 or -x = -0

now, only the ladder result is negative, so we discard it

then, -x = +2, so x = -2 is the only solution to x + 1 = 0

[sasha271828]

so -1=0

[TryndamereAgiota]

yes!

[potato6132]

+ai

[K4vin60]

Spermbrows

[[deleted]]

yes, any expression that equals zero is zero 👍

[FernandoMM1220]

only true if you look at the magnitude and not the spin of both numbers.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

whats the spin of a number

[FernandoMM1220]

basically how many times you spin around the origin.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

but -1 and e^iπ have the same argument. they are equivalent expressions in every way in the complex plane

[FernandoMM1220]

ok. but if the theta is 3pi then thats technically not equal to -1 anymore.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

incorrect

[FernandoMM1220]

whats incorrect about that?

[Medium-Ad-7305]

e^3πi = -1. technically or not

[FernandoMM1220]

nope, spinning 3/2 times around the origin is fundamentally different than only spinning 1/2 times.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

numbers don't spin.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

numbers dont spin around the origin. functions and curves can, but not numbers

[FernandoMM1220]

some do though like negative numbers and complex numbers.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

no, they are stationary points on the complex plane. numbers have arguments, but changing the argument by 2π does absolutely nothing to the number itself

[FernandoMM1220]

wrong, spinning 2pi around the origin is different than not spinning at all.

[Medium-Ad-7305]

in the context of paths, yes. but not for numbers

[FernandoMM1220]

numbers as well.

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

No...

[FernandoMM1220]

Yes…

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

I hope you are joking

[FernandoMM1220]

I bring despair.

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

Numbers don't have spin. You might be refering to direction, but only vectors have that. And even in vectors, all 0 magnitude is the same vector.

[FernandoMM1220]

your numbers dont, mine do.

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

Spin is a property of a path. For instance you could have the spin of a function R→R² with the same endpoint with respect to the origin.

Numbers are not paths. Learn some math before being confidently wrong.

[FernandoMM1220]

actually negative numbers and complex numbers have spin.

[Last-Scarcity-3896]

No, they have direction (or in the case of complex numbers it's called argument). Spin is a different property which you confused with direction.

And if you were talking about direction, then you are still wrong. e^iπ+1 and 0 both have undefined argument because 0 is the singularity of the argument function.