News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Making any integer with four 2s (2025). Parent comment

Re:Making any integer with four 2s (2025) by goodmythical on Sunday November 08, 2026 @12:04AM (#50410541)
Can you not? 9+(9(1/3)) [adding nine to itself a third of a time] is nine plus one third of nine {or nine divided by three} which is one of the three in three times three that equals nine which is three therefore 9+(9(1/3))=11 because 9+3=11
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making any integer with four 2s (2025) by alpaca128 on Sunday November 08, 2026 @05:51AM (#50412123)
9+3=12, but otherwise I agree
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making any integer with four 2s (2025) by red369 on Sunday November 08, 2026 @08:05AM (#50412944)
:)

I like it when people who are clearly smart do things like this! Makes me feel better.

Reminds me of this story: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5663709

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making any integer with four 2s (2025) by srean on Sunday November 08, 2026 @08:35AM (#50413226)
That's Grothendieck multiplication.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Making any integer with four 2s (2025) by mojomark on Sunday November 08, 2026 @09:36AM (#50413726)
By dividing by 3 you are introducing a scaler into the operation.

Multiplication also flips signs (direction). That's why a negative * negative = positive, whereas a negative + negative = negative. The addition operator does not flip direction.

Multiplication is not generally the same as multiple addition operations. However, it has the same result for positive whole numbers.

[ Parent | on HN ]