[ZeroUH]

Either 2+2=4, or it does not.

Prove it.
Oh...and before you come with a wall of text, the proof needs about 5 lines or less on notepad... It's too simple.
And better you prove the right answer or more people who already studied discrete mathematics will laugh hard of your answer...

[Xrow]

Prove it.

Theres nothing to prove.

[ZeroUH]

Theres nothing to prove.

There is, but you don't know how to explain.
Discrete Mathematics, learn about it...

[Xrow]

Prove it.
Oh...and before you come with a wall of text, the proof needs about 5 lines or less on notepad... It's too simple.
And better you prove the right answer or more people who already studied discrete mathematics will laugh hard of your answer...

/Facepalm.
Use logic, kid.
Edit: 2 lines; I win.

If 2 + 2 = 4, then 2 + 2 = 4!
If 2 + 2 ≠ 4, then 2 + 2 = SOMETHING ELSE.

>_>

[ZeroUH]

/Facepalm.
Use logic, kid.

If 2 + 2 = 4, then 2 + 2 = 4!
If 2 + 2 ≠ 4, then 2 + 2 = SOMETHING ELSE.

>_>

Hi-school logic, kid?
I'm laughing HARD how you fail. 
Again...Discrete Mathematics, you will learn about it when join an university. Before that...quiet.

[Xrow]

Hi-school logic, kid?
I'm laughing HARD how you fail.  
Again...Discrete Mathematics, you will learn about it when join an university. Before that...quiet.

LOL
You proved what with that comment?
First of all, learn some proper English ya prick.
Second, If all your going to do is make a fool of yourself and prove that you don't know s**t, then maybe you should consider not taking part in my threads.

YOU be quiet.

[ZeroUH]

LOL
You proved what with that comment?
First of all, learn some proper English ya prick.
Second, If all your going to do is make a fool of yourself and prove you don't know s**t, then maybe you should consider not taking part in my threads.

YOU be quiet.

UMAD kid? Come on!
You're just mad because your arguments doesn't have any base. You are just a hi-school kid who THINKS that know something. And just to be on-topic, the truth hurts (like now, huh?).
Oh! My 8 comrades who lives with me on my republic can't stop laugh of your comment.  
One of them has a good base of philosophy due to his graduation... he asked the samething as Bubu:

u should stop posting links and give me a good example of why truth is absolute

Now, will you give an explanation to my friend here or will avoid as you always do saying "I'M THE BEST! I KNOW EVERYTHING! YOU SHUT UP!"
Ah!... Don't post website links. We can find those sites by searching on google like you. Now...the explanation, please.


Obs: check your PM for the proof of 2+2=4.

[Allie]

64=65.
Go check it on google.
TAKE THAT SOCIETY AND LOGIC

Either 64 equals 64, or it does not.
In this case it does not ;o.

[Leonidas]

64=65.
Go check it on google.
TAKE THAT SOCIETY AND LOGIC

Either 64 equals 64, or it does not.
In this case it does not ;o.

Allie just wooped all of your asses. 

Here's the link you were missing Allie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTxQDjGQh-0

[ZeroUH]

64=65.
Go check it on google.
TAKE THAT SOCIETY AND LOGIC

Either 64 equals 64, or it does not.
In this case it does not ;o.

OMFG! I had that damn exercise on my test >.<
I HATE IT! I HAD TO DRAW ALL THOSE SQUARES!  And my teacher gave me only half of the question..."Drawings are not 100% correct proofs...I could cut all your points here but I'll be nice with you..." ***** teacher..........................
There is another way, which is more simple to explain that but I forgot.

[hawk5005]

The 64 = 65 paradox arises from the fact that the edges of the four pieces, which lie along the diagonal of the formed rectangle, do not coincide exactly in direction. This diagonal is not a straight segment line but a small lozenge (diamond-shaped figure), whose acute angle is
arctan 2/3 - arctan 3/8 = arctan 1/46
which is less than 1 degree 15' . Only a very precise drawing can enable us to distinguish such a small angle. Using analytic geometry or trigonometry, we can easily prove that the area of the "hidden" lozenge is equal to that of a small square of the chessboard.


@Xrow if you like websites so much, read this http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/absolute-truth.htm it's interesting



Now,you two kids play nice and stop cussing each other.

[Optimism]

King failed :/.

I haven't cussed yet, I believe (kid) .

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html

Specifically, a Disjunctive Syllogism.

[supar]

Now, I have to say, why exactly are you arguing over a subject such as this? Such as, this made me go look out for stuff and there was one that got me thinking it said

Mathematics. Science. Here are facts. Beyond there however, it's all relative, subjective ....

World War II was a bad thing. Millions of people died, more suffered.

But if Germany had not invaded Poland, if war had not broken out, my Father and Mother would never have met. I would not exist. For me that would be a bad thing.

Hence, for me WWII was a good thing. I'm not lying when I say that. For me it is true. However for others it is clearly not true.

Good and bad are relative. Their perception and therefore 'truth' are subjective.

Now it may be saying it is relative but is it not absolute truth that it is good for him? HIM, specifically, but it is relative truth to others because good and bad are relative? Dont be angry if i got this all wrong, I'm only a kid trying at a subject you seem all too irritable with. <3 supar LOL
Edit; Dont get angry and flame or whatever. Just saying cause im completely confused with this topic, and im looking for some clearity.

[Optimism]

Yes we've finally managed to separate absolutism per individual and relativity between the individual.

yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

*claps*

Good post, btw sir.

[Bubu]

woo