It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mikerussellus
In Orwells book, 1984 (the movie adaptation) there is a scene where Big Brother is asking Winston that question. The answer they want, is 5.
Originally posted by stander
Originally posted by mikerussellus
In Orwells book, 1984 (the movie adaptation) there is a scene where Big Brother is asking Winston that question. The answer they want, is 5.
Why did it have to be 2 + 2? If you want to break people's common sense and force them to answer wrong, why didn't Big Brother force the expected 1 + 1 = 3?
Why did George Orwell chose this option? Was it a random choice or not?
Originally posted by cancerian42
reply to post by spy66
You have misinterpreted the question, "what does 2+2 equal?" You seem to have counted the elements of the solved equation (2+2=4) instead of finding the solution, 4. And you are correct in that if you take all the elements of the equation and add them together it is indeed 5, but I doubt George Orwell meant that in his book. As far as I know it was just a random easy to answer question to show that even the most fundamental truths can be twisted inside your mind. Where Winston was absolutely sure of this simple truth before, his mind was altered completely and its foundations became based on the party instead of the truth afterward.
Originally posted by spy66
Originally posted by stander
Originally posted by mikerussellus
In Orwells book, 1984 (the movie adaptation) there is a scene where Big Brother is asking Winston that question. The answer they want, is 5.
Why did it have to be 2 + 2? If you want to break people's common sense and force them to answer wrong, why didn't Big Brother force the expected 1 + 1 = 3?
Why did George Orwell chose this option? Was it a random choice or not?
Common sense?
Look at the same equation 2+2 from this point of whew. By using the logic answer 4.
let's say you want 4 to = 2+2 ????
4 dose not automatically = the equation 2+2. As a matter of fact you will never get 4 to = 2+2.
If you divide 4 by 2 you get 2. More accurately you get 2=2. NOT 2+2 ?
Why?
Because you have to make a new equation to divide the 4. That means you have to add 2 negative elements to split the 4 into two equal groups of elements. You will get two equal amounts on each side of equality.
Like this.
4 ÷ 2 = 2 this will after you have worked it out look like this:
2 = 2. This result is not even close to 2+2.
So its wrong to just out of nowhere just decide that 2+2 = 4 Because 4 does not = 2+2.
To get this you have to forget what you have learned in school and start to think totally different. You should start to question what you have been thought.
So what is 2+2 ?
Well it can be anything. But your thought to imagine it to be 4 right of the bat. We are all thought the same logic from the ground up. And all old habits are hard to change.
To do this equation right you have to break everything in to specific elements and power.
You have to look at one piece at a time. You have to ask your self what is 2 ?
Then you have to ask your self what is the other 2?
Then you have to ask your self what power is + in this equation. What is + suppose to do to the two separate elements in this equation. + is what will create the new element on the other side of equality.
If you count all the elements in the equation 2+2 you will get three different elements.
1. 2
2. +
3. 2
Without + you will not have any changes. The Equality symbol represents the time + needs to make the changes to the two different elements of (2).
So you actually have to add in = as well. You cant leave out time.
So now we have 4 different elements that's including time.
1. 2
2. +
3. 2
4. =
Now all these 4 elements create the new element the fifth element. The fifth element is a unknown because you dont know what 2 and 2 is. It is not specified in the equation.
1. 2
2. +
3. 2
4. =
5. ?
If you add up the elements in the equation you get the fifth element. But you dont know what it is until it is created.
Now this is a different way of counting then most people are thought in school.
Orwell, who had "encapsulate[d] the thesis at the heart of his novel" in 1944, wrote most of Nineteen Eighty-Four on the island of Jura, Scotland, during 1947–1948 while critically ill with tuberculosis.[1] He sent the final typescript to his friends Secker and Warburg on 4 December 1948 and the book was published on 8 June 1949.
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by stander
Well of course my counting makes sense.
Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by spy66
I think your taking this too literally.
en.wikipedia.org...
It is used as an example of an obviously false dogma one must believe, similar to other obviously false slogans by the Party in Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Mathematics is normally considered the "purest" type of scholarship, since it is entirely abstract. It would thus seem to be the least likely to be subject to political manipulation, the "final frontier" where everyone can agree on absolute truths.
Originally posted by stander
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by stander
Well of course my counting makes sense.
But not to George Orwell. He never used this approach to make choices.
BTW, 2 + 2 = 4 elements. That's 2, +, 2, and =.
[edit on 8/9/2009 by stander]
Originally posted by spy66
2+2 = 1
2 is a dimension so is the other 2. If you add them together. You get a new dimension that = 1 new dimension. It doesn't have to be 4. It can be a totally new one.
Is that true or false?
Originally posted by cancerian42
Originally posted by spy66
2+2 = 1
2 is a dimension so is the other 2. If you add them together. You get a new dimension that = 1 new dimension. It doesn't have to be 4. It can be a totally new one.
Is that true or false?
2 is a number not a dimension. If you add 2 and 2 you do get 1 number, but that number is not 1, it is 4 and always will be 4, because numbers are abstract, not tangible things, they are amounts. Add 2 buckets of water to 2 buckets of water and you have 4 buckets of water, which may equal 1 tub, but a tub is not a bucket. 2x+2x=4x=y (x=buckets) (y=tub)
Originally posted by stander
reply to post by spy66
You can use symbols and manipulate them apart from what they are primarily used for. For example, you take the year 1984 and break it down into its elements: the digits 1, 9, 8, and 4. The result does not have any practical application, though. But it does. Add the digits together:
1 + 9 + 8 + 4 = 22.
Now treat this as an equation: shrinking the left side will expand the right side:
1984 = 2 + 2
But that's wrong!
No, it's not; it's partially correct
198(4 = 2 + 2)
Now you know that 1984 is actually "1984," the title of George Orwell's book, coz "? = 2 + 2" appears there.
Embarassing simplicity in the making . . .
Lets's ignore it. That's what we do the best.
Originally posted by spy66
I see that you dont understand what i mean if you dont get the equation with the water buckets. And it was so easy too.
It illustrated how 2+2 can be 1. I told you that if you poor 4 buckets of water into a tub. Which is on the other side of equality. You get one dimension of water. Not 4.
But if you ask how many buckets i poured into the tub. I will say 4.
But you will never know it by just looking into the tub. Don't you get it?
[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]