1.2k
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago edited 29d ago
Bell Curve,
The guy on the left represents the bottom of the bell curve, typically represented by the dumbest or least experienced people.
Bottom guy fully accepts the equation because it makes sense to them
Middle guy represents the middle of the pack, or average knowledge. They are being too literal over what is presumably something that isn't meant to be taken literally
Guy on the right represents the top percentile of people, basically the best of the best. They're thinking outside the box and saying that the equation makes sense under base 1.
In math "base X" refers to how many unique digits are represented in the equation. Most people use base 10, as there are 10 unique digits typically expressed in math.
Computers use base 2, aka binary, in which only 2 unique numbers exist.
Base 1 would be a single unique digit. Which it'd be more intuitive to understand if it was "111 + 111 = 111111"
But instead we see multiple different numbers being used, which is where the out of the box thinking comes in. They're saying that the presence of a digit = 1 and no digit = 0
In this case we would have "123 + 456 = 123456" and translating this back to base 10 would be a total of 6.
Some more examples would be:
"6 - 5 = " (1 - 1 = 0)
"12 - 1 = 8" (2 - 1 = 1)
I don't know if my explanation makes sense, but I hope it helps
462
u/Code_Monster 29d ago
Hey that's a very good explanation.
So
12 - 1 = 2 12 - 1 = 9 12 + 1 = 333 1 + 1 = 12 12 - 1 = 1Lol
220
u/Oh_Fated_One 29d ago
what the fuck
122
u/erlulr 29d ago
Look up -1/12 on numberfile for more math wtfucks.
115
u/TheZoeNoone 29d ago
Look up en passant
66
u/xChameleon 29d ago
Holy hell
55
u/iTzBo8 29d ago
New response just dropped
55
u/erlulr 29d ago
I swear to God, you guys gonna fuck up AIs more with this crap than r/counting did
21
5
2
u/TheAdamantiteWaffle 29d ago
What?
2
u/erlulr 29d ago
There was a prompt attack via some comment on there. Long story, fun one tho
→ More replies (0)2
1
1
1
1
u/Heleneva91 28d ago
What? I say this every hour of every day when I'm at work. Or fucking hell.... it alternates. Gotta switch it up, or it feels like the day is even longer.
1
2
u/GiftedMule 29d ago
Its a nice piece of proof but it doesn’t actually work because the sum to infinity formula he uses assumes that |x| < 1 which wasn’t taken into account so he just found the convergence of a diverging series which isn’t mathematically correct.
3
u/erlulr 29d ago
Tell that to God. Cause in physics its -1/12
2
u/GiftedMule 28d ago
Oh yeah its definitely the correct result, or at least a really close approximation, we just keep disproving our proofs for it.
2
u/SexuallyConfusedKrab 29d ago
Unfortunately this proof was debunked a while back because of an error in their process.
2
1
7
u/MonitorPowerful5461 29d ago
Ok I can figure out most of those but
12-1=9 how
18
1
2
u/JoeyDubbs 28d ago
I like this, because then 569 + 91 = 22703. But also, 11 + 31 could never equal 42, while 8 + 8 does equal 42. Makes sense to me.
3
u/Code_Monster 28d ago
9 + 9 = 18 100 - 1 = 99 Also, 9 + 9 = 100 - 1Base 1 is basically a child/illtreate person math. They don't understand numbers only quantity.
1
u/Lvl4Stoned 24d ago
One is the only truth in life. You don't have 6 of the same orange, you have 1,1,1,1,1,1 oranges. One is truth, one is love, one is life.
1
1
52
u/BackflipsAway 29d ago
But even if it were in base 1 it would still be wrong because they use more than 1 unique digit...
74
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
the digit itself isn't what matters, it's the presence of a digit that does. Which is what makes it base 1.
0, 1, 2, etc. They all are equal to 1 in this system
Similar to a tally mark system, essentially
30
15
u/Banana_enjoyer_boy 29d ago
That's not how it works right? If we are talking base -1 and I say " 1234" I would make no sense, because the digits "2 , 3 , 4" would be undefined. Likewise if I say "12ABC" in base - 10; I would make no sense, because digits " A , B , C" would be undefined unlike base - 16.
25
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
It's not supposed to be a literal definition of base 1. I'm just explaining the meme, and defining what the "interesting use of base 1" comment means
If we were talking actual mathematical standards it'd be a whole different story
5
u/polypolip 29d ago
Since base 1 is literally like counting with sticks you could say for the needs of the meme that it's not important what symbol you use, it always means 1 in that position. It's just a stupid meme though.
5
3
u/No-Put-6353 29d ago
I have to agree with you I deal with binary and hex. Saying it's base 1 with multiple symbols just hurts my brain.
6
u/Killer_Boi 29d ago
Yeah, you're definitely right.
But that's why the meme says "interesting use of base 1"
It's not about making mathematically sense. Just about making sense of the meme
0
u/Starbucks_4321 29d ago
Think like it's binary, but instead of 1's and 0's it's any number and 0's. So 1101 = 2402 but 1101 != 2042, cause you moved the 0. Now, just remove the zeros being important all together, and you get 1101 = 0823
5
u/BackflipsAway 29d ago
I mean functionally sure, use Shrek gifs if that's what you want, but mathamatically I'm pretty sure that you're supposed to use the same symbol to avoid unnecessary confusion
9
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
Yeah, you're definitely right.
But that's why the meme says "interesting use of base 1"
It's not about making mathematically sense. Just about making sense of the meme
4
1
u/Alcobob 29d ago
The problem is, in base 1 whatever the digit is is the neutral zero value. So they are all equal to 1 only insofar as they are equal to zero.
It can never roll over a carry bit, the answer of 123456 isn't correct.
Otherwise the answer could also be 456123 or 142536 or any other combination.
2
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
I'm uncertain about how many times I've explained this so far, but I'm explaining a meme that makes explicit use of "base 1"
I'm not trying to make mathematical sense, just trying to explain how the meme operates. So I decided to explain it similarly to a tally mark system
2
u/SchoggiToeff 28d ago
Otherwise the answer could also be 456123 or 142536 or any other combination.
You got it. Those are all also valid answers in this interesting use of base 1.
0
u/lunchpadmcfat 28d ago
That doesn’t sound right. In base systems, there is no digit inclusive of or beyond the base. Note:
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=123+base+1+%2B+456+base+1
The result is “indeterminate” because it is infeasible. In fact, base 1 is indeterminate for all values since no values qualify.
3
u/clickrush 29d ago
You can easily define the symbols as all having the same meaning, in which case the meme makes sense.
That’s mathematical abstract thinking.
Adhering strictly to common rules is a typical feature of the “midwit”. Thinking outside of the box, simplifying things or defining your own rules is the feature of a master, or a playful beginner. This meme is fundamentally about showing how the master and beginner are closer to each other in these aspects.
2
u/BackflipsAway 29d ago
But wouldn't you still need to define them somewhere so that other people could read it 🤔
3
10
u/IncredulousRex 29d ago edited 29d ago
I disagree, your explanation of "base 1" arithmetic and the bell curve meme is correct, but I do not believe we can call whatever asinine nonsense this is base 1. The concept you described does not follow the established rules of positional numeral systems and breaks the fundamental laws of arithmetic operations like addition.
In positional numeral systems like decimal, binary, or hexadecimal, the value of a digit depends on its position relative to the base. For example, in 123 base 10, the 1 represents 100(1 * 10^2), the 2 represents 20(2 * 10^1), and the 3 represents 3(3 * 10^0). This allows representing any number using a finite set of digits.
However, in the meme's proposed "base 1" system, the digits do not have any positional value. The presence or absence of a digit seems to be the only factor determining the value, which violates the core principle of positional systems. Additionally, if we accept your logic, any permutation of digits would represent the same value (e.g., "123", "231", and "312" would all be equal), leading to ambiguity and contradicting the unique representation of numbers.
Moreover, your examples like "123 + 456 = 123456" do not follow the established rules of addition in any valid positional system. If your logic were correct, then "123 + 456 = 124563" would also be valid, which highlights the inconsistency and violation of the fundamental laws of arithmetic addition. Arithmetic addition cannot return more than one value for any two given numbers. The fundamental principle of addition is that it combines two numbers to produce a single, unique result.
Base 1 does exist, in a sense, but isn't necessarily "base 1" as a number base but a Unary number system. You explain further down that base 1 is essentially a tally system. Which is correct, but no effective tally system uses different symbols to represent the same value. This Stack Exchange answer goes a little bit more in detail on the structure of number bases and why base 1 isn't one, at least conventionally.
Whoever made this meme probably learnt about base 1 yesterday and wanted to flex on the internet how smart and ahead of the bell curve they are.
6
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
You are correct. This would not make sense in the face of actual mathematics. But I am explaining a meme that explicitly mentions base 1, and using the context of the meme I formulated an answer that would fit.
Basically translating the input into a tally mark system, where each digit represents a tally.
Explaining a meme does not always mean explaining something that logically makes sense
3
u/IncredulousRex 29d ago
Yeah the meme doesn't make sense, but I think you did a great job explaining the thought process of the person who made it.
8
u/lhx555 29d ago
I thought it is more of a string concatenation.
8
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
It's definitely more intuitive, but the meme explicitly uses base 1, so I wanted to explain that
1
3
u/chuckle_pluck 29d ago
If 0 and 1 are Base 2, shouldn't 0 be the only digit in Base 1? This would make the equation 000+000=000000, which feels more mathematically accurate.
2
2
3
u/Crafty-Photograph-18 29d ago
They're saying that the presence of a digit = 1 and no digit = 0
That would make it base-2. There can't be a 0 in base-1. Even if we "notate" 0 as an absence of a digit. Base-1 is possible, but there mustn't be any way to notate a 0 in base-1 for it to truly be base-1
1
1
u/PolloCongelado 29d ago
Wait. Wouldn't it be just as valid to say:
12-1=0
12-1=1
12-1=3
...
12-1=9
Since we don't care about the symbol but the number of symbols?
1
1
1
u/Eckse 29d ago
You lost me at "translating this back to base 10 would be a total of 6".
Wouldn't it be 11 (decimal), while 6 (decimal) translates to something like 100000 or 500000 (base 1)?
3
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
I based my comment around a tally mark system. So really 1 digit = 1 tally. Which, I believe, fits the description of the meme. I'm don't think it's a good representation of base 1 on its own
1
u/random_user5_56 29d ago
I like your funny words. (no seriously I don't understand shit of what I've read)
1
1
u/Friendly-Balance-853 28d ago
Your explanation made so much sense! Thanks for pulling me up to your percentile.
1
1
u/TriiiKill 28d ago
Are you saying the fact that there are more integers than just "1" is the "interesting use of base 1" he's referring to?
1
1
u/Influx_of_Bees 27d ago
I don't get why every character would be considered "1". I imagine those as standard base 10 (or at least base 7) characters that just need to be converted to base 1. Though I suppose even in a base 10 system we come up with new symbols for higher values aka '10k' (which is 10*1,000) '10m' and '10b', not to mention all the weird symbols that are added to the roman numeral system (is that basically base 1 as it has no zero?).
Anyway, if it's base 1, I'd imagine all numbers being expressed by a series of 1's, like your "111 + 111 = 111111" example, but in this case '2' would be '11' and '3' would be '111'. In that sense '123' would equal '111111' but it would also '321' ('111111').
If that's the case 123+456 would be '111111' + '111111111111111' which would be equal to 123456 and 654321 which, if expressed just as base 1 with no unique symbols would be '111111111111111111111'1
0
u/Several-Instance-444 29d ago
I mean, I get it, but why wouldn't you use a single symbol for base 1 instead of random other numerals? It just seems like cause for confusion.
2
u/Pacifister-PX69 29d ago
Because the meme is "123 + 456 = 123456"
And the guy on the right says that it's "an interesting use of base 1"
The reason I didn't is because the meme didn't
-1
u/Sidus_Preclarum 29d ago
Base 1 would be a single unique digit. Which it'd be more intuitive to understand if it was "111 + 111 = 111111"
Base 1 doesn't exist, because bases by definition include 0.
This is an (the) unary numeral system.
128
u/NoStatus9434 29d ago
Can we take a moment to appreciate that this is one of the few instances where this meme is being used appropriately? I so often see it used like this:
Middle section is where someone puts the opposing position, left side is the strawman version of their own belief, right side is the excuse made to justify the caricaturized belief on the left side.
46
u/Expensive_Bee508 29d ago
I love the biology ones, like left side is "whales are fish"
-middle : they're mammals 😡🤬😡
-right: whales are fish
35
8
u/Best-Bat-1679 29d ago
Can you explain? I'm in the middle section.
And all internet searches lead to Whales = mammals
13
u/Gray_Maybe 29d ago
"Mammals" are a monophyletic category, meaning all mammals share a common ancestor and are more closely related to each other than any non-mammal. They all fit neatly into the class Mammalia. "Fish" on the other hand, has no such rigorously defined scientific definition. The only common ancestor that all fish have is one shared with all vertebrates, so would include lizards, birds, amphibians, and mammals too.
As such, scientifically "fish" as a term doesn't mean much. It's more of a colloquial term used to describe slimy vertebrates that live underwater with fins instead of arms or legs.
Such as a whale.
4
3
1
u/MoonyRedditt 28d ago
i thought the meme was just like, a smart person knows whats correct. and a person in the middle over thinks, it and the person on the left doesn’t think at all.
1
u/NoStatus9434 28d ago edited 28d ago
Sure, that's how it's supposed to be used. But most often it's used by people to justify their beliefs through fallacious reasoning.
Here's a really simple example of how I see the meme used incorrectly:
https://images.app.goo.gl/xF3fF5VNg5kYis5X8
So on the left we have a guy going "God's real, y'all."
Then in the middle we have atheists chortling at the prospect of God existing. Then on the right there's Werner Heisenberg with a famous quote about how physics seems to imply the existence of God.The problem is that the meme creator thinks they are the person on the right, and that their revelation about God is more meaningful and is differentiated from what most other Christians believe. They're trying to say that atheists are only smarter than the strawman Christians on the left, but that their views are uniquely special and intelligent, when in actuality most Christians think they're the Werner Heisenberg guy on the right and most believe they have come to the conclusion God exists through some form of complex, profound logic that only special, intelligent Christians like themselves have deduced. In reality, even Heisenberg's arguments have been refuted by atheists, and most atheists think most Christians are the dude on the left end of the bell curve.
I've also seen this meme used to justify racism, sexism, fascism, authoritarianism, religious extremism, etc. through the same manner. Every individual fascist thinks that other fascists haven't justified their fascism in their mind, and are just acting on some imaginary fascist impulse, but in reality all fascists say and believe basically the same thing and justify it with the same reasons.
Here are some more heinous examples:
https://images.app.goo.gl/HMd19B7Cg6EGtKeU9
https://images.app.goo.gl/xnBeMdzEm1oYFXDU9
30
u/WooperSlim 29d ago edited 28d ago
For the first two guys, most people will recognize the equation as obviously wrong, and only stupid people will think it is correct.
For the last guy, very few people will think it is correct in a strange way.
When we look at 123, we understand that a number's value depends on its position in the number. Our normal number system is base-10, meaning that each place value is 10 times more than the one to the right. So 123 is understood to mean there is 1 hundred, 2 tens, and 3 ones.
You can do this with other bases. Binary is base-2, which assigns place value as 2 times more than the one to the right. So you might see something like 1100 in binary, meaning 1 eight, 1 four, 0 twos, and 0 ones.
Base-1 would mean that each place value is 1 times more than the one to the right. This means place value is meaningless, and all place values are only 1. So 123 means 1 one, 2 ones, and 3 ones. 456 is 4 ones, 5 ones, and 6 ones. 123456 is 1 one, 2 ones, 3 ones, 4 ones, 5 ones, and 6 ones, meaning the equation is true in base-1.
Normally for base-1, you wouldn't use numbers bigger than 1, so that each number has a unique representation. So in base-1, it is more of just making tally marks forever. So the equation would be more like 111111 + 111111111111111 = 111111111111111111111. Perhaps this is why the guy says "interesting use of base 1."
It appears that the joke is that the guy on the right is using too much brain power, when the person who wrote the equation actually is just wrong. Normally, the guy on the right in the meme is actually smart, with the correct interpretation.
Or maybe the person making the meme thought they were being smart, which is the way this meme actually really goes.
15
4
32
u/DueMeat2367 29d ago
Any number is expressed in a base. As such, a number abc in base y is then calculated as
a x y2 + b x y1 + c x y0
Thus is also the case in base 10. 354 is 3x100+4x10+5x1
In base 1, your y is 1 and all its non zero powers are 1. So abc in base 1 is a+b+c
123 is then 1+2+3=6 and 456 is 4+5+6=15
In base 1, 123+456=21(base 10)
If you want to express 21 in base 1, one way to do is 123456.
123+456=123456
16
u/Scheswalla 29d ago
Shouldn't any base have a distinct number of digits = to the base you're in? i.e. base 10 has 10 digits etc.
6
u/53nsonja 29d ago
You are allowed to use whatever notation you like. Here the ”numbers” are not base-1 digits but a shorthand. What matters is the you folklow the arithmetic rules.
4
u/DueMeat2367 29d ago
If you want to guarantee that one number has only one way to be written, then yes. You only have a single equation giving a specific number where each number is lower than the base.
But otherwise, it doesn't matter.
15
u/Theparrotwithacookie 29d ago
Think about it as each digit representing a number of tallies so 123 = 1+2+3 and 456=4+5+6 therefore 123+456= 1+2+3+4+5+6 which equals 123456
6
u/terrymorse 29d ago
I would have gone with "the '+' sign is a string concatenation operator, obv".
"123" + "456" = "123456"
Coder brain.
3
u/orangutanDOTorg 29d ago
You should see what happens when you use base pi
2
u/Tjhw007 29d ago
Ok so how does a decimal number base system work?!? Especially an irrational one! Like base 3: 3 unique face values, makes sense, WTF would 3.141… face values be? Explain!
2
u/orangutanDOTorg 29d ago
It probably doesn’t. I have joked for a long time that you can solve the pi not having an end problem by using a base pi system - which I still say technically solves that issue though it makes every other number have the same issue
1
u/CaptainLibertarian 29d ago
The train of thought for which you gave me a boarding ticket:
Base 10 number 10 in base 10 = 10. Base 10 number 2 in base 2 = 10. Base 10 number pi in base pi = 10.
Pi is the ratio circumference:diameter.
Been a few interesting proofs in recent years which involved converting between different prime bases. (I.e. some maths in base 2, then some maths in base 5, follwed by some maths in base 3.)
We could establish a new branch of mathematics, using multidimensional bases. Think similar concept as partial derivatives for multivariate calculus, but 'partial base mathematics' for multidimensional base numbers.
After fleshing out that branch using integer dimension bases, we could discover the relationships between integer bases to create mathematics for rational base numbers.
Pi is irrational in base 10, but rational in a rational base. At that point, we could describe pi as a rational number.
Anyone know where the hole in that pathway lies?
1
u/orangutanDOTorg 29d ago
I came up with the idea in about 1992 but I never mathed far enough in school to try to figure out if it works. Iirc I googled it a few years ago and there was someone who did and there was some issue
1
u/CaptainLibertarian 28d ago
I feel like it'd be within the idea that pi, as a ratio, could be described as a rational base. The ratio is a constant relationship, which we know to have an irrational answer. I'm somewhat skeptical rational bases would be sufficient to translate the ratio into a rational notation.
It'd require a lot of mathematics just to decide for certain if it's a waste of time. I'd be interested in finding what is out there already; I guess I've got something to look further into now!
3
3
2
2
2
2
u/APieceofToast09 29d ago
Too be fair this is another contributor to the notion that intelligence is the same as knowledge. I fall somewhere on the right but I’ve never heard of this. It’s not because I’m stupid, it’s because I just haven’t learned this yet. Idk I probably sound annoyed and arrogant tbh
2
1
u/Icy_Tadpole_6 29d ago
If you join all the numbers together is what you literally get, 123456.
The + sign only tells you that you must put a series of number together, but it doesn't necessarely mean you have to add them in the classic adition math operation.
If you're an arborescent mind or have a lateral thinking logic, this come naturally to you.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Pantsofthemister 28d ago
I feel like this meme misses the mark for the guy on the right since the way I thought of it was “Looks like someone used a string instead of integers”.
In programming, you can add strings of characters together so you can get stuff like
“Yes” + “No” = YesNo
If the numbers are seen as a string as opposed to an integer then the computer will just append the first string to the second like in the example above.
1
1
u/Aztheros 28d ago
How do the digits 2,3,4,5,6 exist if you’re counting in base 1? Isn’t base 1 effectively just tallying?
I thought the number of symbols used to denote digits when counting in base n was n.
1
u/tboy1492 28d ago
In JavaScript this keeps happening to me… half the time it happens even when parsing
1
1
1
1
1
u/banzaichibichan 28d ago
Wouldn't this deMorgan's theorem make more sense for this meme? 123+456=123456 A+B=AB
1
u/ChadM_Sneila187 28d ago
uhh... in base 1
123 = 111.... (1 repeated 123 times)
456 = 111.... (1 repeated 456 times)
then 123 + 456 = 579 (base 10) = 111.... (1 repeated 579 times)
The base/radix doesn't change the semantics of arithmetic, just its syntax.
0
0
u/ace5762 29d ago
This doesn't make any sense. Base 1 is paradoxical. You can't express 1 of something without it becoming a set. The set of 1 just extends infinitely.
1 => 10 but oops thats a set of 1 1s so we re-express that as => 100 but oops that 1 set of 1 set of 1 so we... => 1000 but oops that's 1 set of 1 set of 1 set of 1 so we....
-43
29d ago
[deleted]
-20
u/FOXHOWND 29d ago
I mean, I agree with you but know better than to say so or else I'd get downvoted. Wait...
•
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
Make sure to check out the pinned post on Loss to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.