Originally posted by: rgwalt
Also, I'm not seeing where the third step comes from...
Ryan
That's okay, that's the step where the whole thing starts falling apart.
You use a=b, then substitue a*b for b², then you subtract b² from both sides.
To perform that step you have to assume a=b. Which is okay...but it bites you in the butt later in this "proof".
(a + b) (a - b) = b(a - b)
Since a=b has to be true, for the 3rd step to be true this step is actually:
(a+b)(0) = b(0)
Which is also okay because 0 = 0.
But you can have any quanity x and any quantity y and say 0x = 0y.
That doesn't mean x = y.
And you can't divide both sides of 0x = 0y by 0 and conclude that x = y. The 0s don't cancel like that. That's not how division by 0 in standard "newtonian" mathematics works.