Terrence D HowardVerified account

The mistake is at the bottom of the first page where he implements the associative and cumulative “laws”.

You need to re read it. There are no mistakes

yes there is, a subtle mistake - author does not know what multiplication is.

idk man he said there were no mistakes and he seems pretty smart

Stick to acting bro. You failed miserably in trying to explain your flawed mathematical illogical expression. Nice try though

Gladly point out the flaw in proper multiplication.

went to bed 1x1 was 1. woke up and it made sense that 1x1 was 2! how did that happen??

Ask yourself this: If 1x1=2, what does 2÷1 equal? What about 2x1? If you have one $1 try to buy something for $2 and tell us what happens

to the unenlightened they will want another $1 poor unenlightened soul lol

What about what they say that any number multiplied by 1 is itself. In this concept 1 x 1 has to equal 1

That would contradict the law of action and reaction

That's physics. It's about physical things and energies. Math is about logic, and this violates all the rules it claims to use.

Maybe this would help illuminate the difference between these ways of thinking - physical vs. logical. https://youtu.be/MZZPF9rXzes 

video unavailable. The plot thickens

It was 2 years ago, and youtube hates streaming through twitter clients. It's not a plot.

it's unavailable in the YouTube client and I was being facetious anyway but yes there is most definitely a plot tbh

You cannot just assign letters to numbers randomly as a base for your calculations 1x1=1 is not axb=c it is axa=a squared