FIND THE FLAW

[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...

[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.

[101dalmatians]

[rcoker7]

Thanks! These problems are really fun to think through.

[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]

[101dalmatians]

[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

[007math]

[darksaber21]

[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.

[MistaPotta]

[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]

[darksaber21]

You can't divide by zero, hence the fallacy is within the third equality, since [unparseable or potentially dangerous latex formula] is zero.