"2." represents the intersection of a set of potential values (implied by the variance associate3d with decimal uncertainty) including 2.0000000000000 to some higher value up to but not including 3, depending on the cutoff model. Since these values are all unequal to 1the premise is false

Easy. If you give me two dollars, I'll give you one. I'll do it as many times at it takes before you concede that they aren't the same.

(The actual answer is "By definition." You're welcome to believe otherwise -- people believe all sorts of falsehoods -- but that doesn't change the fact.)

## Discussions

8 years ago

"2." represents the intersection of a set of potential values (implied by the variance associate3d with decimal uncertainty) including 2.0000000000000 to some higher value up to but not including 3, depending on the cutoff model. Since these values are all unequal to 1the premise is false

8 years ago

Easy. If you give me two dollars, I'll give you one. I'll do it as many times at it takes before you concede that they aren't the same.

(The actual answer is "By definition." You're welcome to believe otherwise -- people believe all sorts of falsehoods -- but that doesn't change the fact.)

9 years ago

it has everything to do with nothing so therefore the answer is actually 42

^{2}=1+2=(1=2).......^{i think my math is right,}