What's more true: 2+2=4 or II+II=IV?

Just because there are two different ways of saying the truth, doesn't mean that one of them isn't wrong. And a lot of times you get it wrong.

Just because 2+2 = 4, doesn't mean that II + II = V. You have to understanding the math in order to understand the mapping function.

A lot of times people who don't really understand the math or science make mistakes that, to them at least, seem perfectly reasonable. This is the reason that education in math and science is crucial.

This is a math joke based on this principle,

In my experience, most misunderstanding is manufactured. People who don't like an idea will often caricature it for instance.

You know as much about Roman numerals as you do Doctor Who. Living Lava even gave you the right answer.

V is five, IV is four.

How will you ever know when films were made?

The only point of interest in this is that the church resisted the use of Arabic numbers for some time. Clearly it believed Roman numerals were more true.

You apparently misunderstood my post Izzy. The word "doesn't" in English is a contraction of "does" and "not". It acts as the negative form of the word does.

My point was that even in Roman numerals, the math has to be correct. I sorry for not dumbing it down for you.

If that's true, you dumbed it down too much and lost the point you were trying to make.

The only point you did make was that you don't understand Roman numerals, and your ham-fisted attempts to make it about something else only reinforces the point.

That's nice Izzy. Would you care for a Jelly Baby?

There is a big difference between a lack of understanding and a misunderstanding. We all lack understanding about most things. It takes time and effort to develop expertise in any topic.

Misunderstanding is when you are confident in your understanding of something that you don't really understand. This is quite common as shown in the Dunning-Kruger effect.

It takes a long time to master topics like science and mathematics. There are people who believe they have an understanding even though they haven't gone to a University to study the topics or done the equivalent amount of study on their own.

I am speaking rather of the common species of "misunderstanding", when someone says something meaning X, and his interlocutor understands something else, Y, or PRETENDS to understand Y in bad faith.

An example would be how our mutual friend Izzy 'misunderstood' your point about math in roman vs arabic numbers.

Hey, Genius, I need your experty on this one! 0=1 right?

When I was a younger man, away at college, one of the dudes that lived next door to me was a math major. One day, he came barging in to my room, hair messed up, his wardrobe in shambles, maybe a little dazed with a wad of paper bundled in his sweaty hands...
"I've done it" he exclaimed as he threw the papers on the desk. "I have proven 0=1!!!" he then turned and shuffled out of the room.

My room mate and I looked at each other and carried on watching TV.

These are the things that happen while away at college.

Actually the 0=1 thing is a very interesting example. Everyone learns in high school that you can do any operation to one side of any equation as long as you do the same operation on the other side. As this video shows ... this is a lie. We are teaching kids a mathematical rule that is technically wrong (although it works most of the time).

Of course any math or science student corrects this misconception.

Many years ago I worked with Judah Schwartz, a Harvard Professor and an expert in the field of algebra education (i.e. what is the best way to reach algebra to students. Teachers give kids incorrect math as a shortcut. In my opinion it is a pedegogically bad. We should be teaching kids about solution sets rather than giving them rules that work most of the time.

The reason the normal rules fail in many of these setups is because he divides the solution set by zero meaning the inverse can be set to 1 (or to any other number).

But the interesting question is why we teach kids methods that don't always work in the first place.

That really wasn't what you were saying in your post.

Congratulations though, you'll have an excellent career in lolotics (that's a word I often use for politics) with your ability to try to cover your tuchus quickly.

I did read it. My conclusion, even prior to seeing izzy's response was the same as his.

Further, I am not his 'fanboy' or that of anybody on this site.

You are in serious need of mental health care, max.

Bullshit Sturgis. Izzy is my stalker. He follows me from thread to thread without even trying to address the topic. On a fair number of threads you are right behind Izzy. You might even be his sock puppet for all I know.

Since you are here anyway, do you have anything to say about the topic?

Do you have any real examples of this actually occurring?

Peter Davison's character, (pre Doctor Who) has to share a room with someone like that in the cult comedy A Very Peculiar Practice.



You can thank me later for making you aware of another great comedy you'd never heard of before.

Don't flatter yourself, you're clutching at straws again. I don't stalk you, I just comment when you say something stupid, bigoted, wrong or all three.

If anyone has a fanboy/sockpuppet it's you and Oralloy.

If you knew anything about Sturgis and me you'd realise we weren't even on speaking terms until about two years ago.

The truth is, individuals like Sturgis, Tsarsepan, me, and I'm sure there's loads of others out there, have all come to the same conclusion about you.

When this happens in the real World, which I'm sure is a regular occurrence, do you accuse others of being me or my fanboys?

Admittedly, I am very loveable but I have limits, Occams razor, people disagree with you because you're disagreeable. That's why.