Page 1 of 1
FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Fri Apr 26, 2013 12:01 pm
by 101dalmatians
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] IS NOT EQUAL TO [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
SO,
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
SO,
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
@ SXK: PLEASE DON'T SAY THE ANSWER, FOR YOU SENT ME THIS...
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:51 pm
by rcoker7
The integration by parts equation is really just the integral of the product rule, which means it is only true up to a constant. Usually, the method is still useful and we can ignore the constant as long as the two integrals are of different functions. However, there technically should be a "C" in the integration by parts equation, so we really have 0=-1+C, which is perfectly ok. In other words, the two integrals of tangent don't have to be equal, they can differ by a constant.
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Sat Apr 27, 2013 7:57 am
by 101dalmatians
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:50 pm
by rcoker7
Thanks! These problems are really fun to think through.
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:30 pm
by MistaPotta
I love these. Next one.
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:35 pm
by 101dalmatians
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:38 pm
by qwerty123
Is it b/c [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
only applies when a & b are both positive numbers?
If thats not right, then I have no clue. :P
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 8:59 pm
by 007math
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:08 pm
by darksaber21
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Mon Apr 29, 2013 9:11 pm
by Fredfredburger
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
You can't do that because the reciprocal of i is -i.
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Tue Apr 30, 2013 1:21 am
by MistaPotta
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Wed May 01, 2013 2:38 pm
by 101dalmatians
I guess this is an easy one to figure out... @nsguy,sxk -> DON'T TELL THE ANS. CUZ UVE ALREADY SEEN IT... sxk sent this to me earlier...
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
[unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula]
Re: FIND THE FLAW
Posted:
Wed May 01, 2013 4:09 pm
by darksaber21
You can't divide by zero, hence the fallacy is within the third equality, since [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] is zero.