@AveraWyvern said [^](/forum/redirect/post/iLgT0UxK)
> > you cant get rid of the stuff in the parentheses, that would create a false answer. You would first have to solve in those parentheses, which would be 0, which means that actually means 0=0
>
> According to wyvern logic, 4 = 5 because I said so ;p
Wyvern logic = fallacious logic
@Quasar3C273 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/nowIQoCf)
> > According to wyvern logic, 4 = 5 because I said so ;p
>
> Wyvern logic = fallacious logic
You just don’t understand wyvern mathematics ._.
No more wrong answers!
2+2
=0''+0''
=0''''
=4
All hail the Peano axioms!
2+2
=2+1'
=2'' (n+1=n', successor operation)
=3'
=4
67..
@chessplayer123581321 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/TLNlxJkL)
> 2+2
> =2+1'
> =2'' (n+1=n', successor operation)
> =3'
> =4
Wait... Shouldn't it be `0''`? 0 is the first natural number.
@KhrivenilSSP said [^](/forum/redirect/post/IHD8fknZ)
> > 2+2
> > =2+1'
> > =2'' (n+1=n', successor operation)
> > =3'
> > =4
>
> Wait... Shouldn't it be `0''`? 0 is the first natural number.
Strictly speaking, you are right
2+2
=2+1'
=2+0''
=2''
=3'
=4
As far as i know, both 0 and 1 are valid as first natural number, and there are two variations of PA seeing 0 and 1 as natural number
@chessplayer123581321 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/bRfmyFGt)
> As far as i know, both 0 and 1 are valid as first natural number, and there are two variations of PA seeing 0 and 1 as natural number
Yes. In Liu Xinyu's *Isomorphism: Mathematics in Programming*, the first N.Num. is 0, while in *Elementary Mathematics Research*, the first one is 1.
@AveraWyvern said [^](/forum/redirect/post/YwUSVJAx)
> > > According to wyvern logic, 4 = 5 because I said so ;p
> >
> > Wyvern logic = fallacious logic
>
> You just don’t understand wyvern mathematics ._.
Wyvern Mathematics = Heretic Mathematics, at least it won't make any sense
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.