it is not comes with mistake.
Its comes with all rule and simple way
i can proof it, thats 2+2=5.

Then proof it!

He don't get it.... "proof " "prove"

Probably a genius....but...I will never understand the hugeness of his greatness until he learns to speak English.

Usually the best substitute for brains is silence; the brain is like a TV set, when it goes blank,it's a good idea to turn it off.
Here we have what Andy Warhol once described as a genius with an IQ of (perhaps as high as) 60. Isn't it remarkable how tolerant the public is, they can forgive everything except genius...
An intelligence test such as 2+2= 5 is really meant to show a person how smart they could have been not to try it...

it is not logic. Its proof is mathematical.

People, if you are not khow then also reply plz..

Come on...

2.5+2.1=5 rounded.

I think I can proof it...

You tell me?

x=y x^2=xy x^2-y^2=xy-y^2 (x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y) x+y=y 2y=y 2=1 1=0

If 2+2=2+2+0 then applying the Lemma proof we have 0=1,2+2+0=2+2+1=5

So 2+2=5

It's the question...It isn't worded right.

The actual proof is that if you were to round, which is typically done with numbers a 2.5 (3) plus a 2.1 (2) you would get five.

Or he could be a big Orwell fan...Hell if I know.

hah! Go to Russia for a month - they will proof more advanced things to you!

Oh, so not Lemma?

Nerd joke really.

It goes a few ways though, you can round the answer or just round the numbers added, even if you had 2.46 + 2.44 the rounded answer would still be 5.

so,Mathematics are illogical then?

Now make X=1 at the beginning of the equation:

x=y ... 1=Y

x^2=xy ... 1 squared = 1x1

x^2-y^2=xy-y^2 ... 1 squared - 1 squared = (1x1)- 1 squared

(x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y) ... (1+1)(1-1)= 1(1-1)

The problem with the alleged proof is that (x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y) does not give you x+y=y. Instead, (x+y)(x-y)=y(x-y) gives you 0=0.

Now if X is zero, then 0+0=0 and 2x0=0. There is no 2=1.

I knew I was forgetting something. x begins as a non-zero number in this formula.

Well, that's how I was taught anyway. I just noticed something that I never questioned before though...since this doesn't work if our nonzero is a negative number, I assume it would not work if it were a complex nonzero either...so it must be a positive nonzero. Maybe.

I think. I'm really rusty and this is probably one of the only things besides pi that I actually half-azz remember from 3456789 years ago.

Really, the attempted 'proof' of 2 + 2 = 5 is based on a distorted type of Trigonometry, which was in essence the source of today's Calculus (just try to draw Tangent or Secant without running into the idea of Calculus' derivative & integral, respectively), and actually is the result of any additive equavalence of any two numbers' to being alike to any number, (because measuring hypotenuse of a given sides is essentially multiplicative, hence partially irrational).

Will Hunting would know what to do.

Just wanna say after reading all the threads, my head hurts. Are you all mad? 2+2=4 that's the way it is!

I am still waiting for someone to produce five American pennies from two pairs of American pennies.

Does devaluation of the currency come into play, as we all know a penny is no longer worth a full penny. So if devaluation is factored into your 4 pennies, how many more will you need to bring the total to full value...one or two more perhaps...that way we could have 5 or 6 more...