The initial 1 is the only number of value in the equation. The second 1 is how many times it occurs. That’s why the answer to 1, one time, is one. This isn’t difficult.
@kevinvh2003
3 ай бұрын
He thinks talking to a non scientist would make it right 😂
@zachbosworth6139
3 ай бұрын
it's the square root of 2 part that is kind of interesting. not that it negates 1x1=2 but still interesting
@Rcorrales
3 ай бұрын
You don’t get it. He’s saying that how come something that is not multiplied being said it’s multiplied. 1 multiplied by 1 is not multiplication it’s just “once” Multiplication= made more of
@arlesthegreat
3 ай бұрын
Huh?
@kevingeorge5159
3 ай бұрын
but one thing in two piles is not two things...it is one half of one thing, twice. the logic becomes. it follows two piles of 2 things is four things in total. there is a logical gap.
@jesse_cole
2 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard wrote his entire paper based on a misunderstanding of what the word "multiplication" means. It doesn't mean "always makes more of something." This is what an insane person does. They start with a misunderstanding, then they construct their entire reality on top of it.
@MrBeen992
2 ай бұрын
Not necessarily. Gottlob Frege wrote a whole book based on a false premise on sets. Russell debunked his entire book with a paradox.
@jesse_cole
2 ай бұрын
@@MrBeen992 The only paradox here is Howard.
@MrBeen992
2 ай бұрын
@@jesse_cole I just offered a counterexample to your premise that Terrence " based his "entire paper on a misunderstanding" . That has occurred many times in intellectual history and is not "insane"
@jesse_cole
2 ай бұрын
@MrBeen992 lol, no. You didn't offer a single counterpoint to the fact that TERRENCE based his book on a misunderstanding. The fact that mainstream ideas have been debunked in the past doesn't make 1x1 equal 2, dude. The burden of proof here is on Terrence to prove he's not wrong (and you, if you want to convince anyone that he's right). Do better.
@MrBeen992
2 ай бұрын
@@jesse_cole LOL ytou still dont understand. I was trying to offer an argument that you dont have to be insane, as you suggest, to base your theory :"on a misunderstanding". Do you understand now, or are you as dense as Howard ?
@einergonzalez210
2 ай бұрын
the scary part is not terrence howard saying this. The scary part is hiw many people agree.
@jasonryan9659
2 ай бұрын
I agree with him, I thought it when I was in school
@not_a_human_being
2 ай бұрын
come on - everyone had that sort of thoughts at some point. Most of us don't understand contemporary physical theories, we operate on "authority" basis. If someone is said to be smart, then so he is. Don't pretend you have working understanding of Quantum Field Theory, than theory of this guy.
@Mttaughtyou
2 ай бұрын
The real thing to be scared of is to be so emotionally vested in the theories that were etched into all of our brains systematically through institutions, Then to just be proven incorrect scientifically and mathematically, our minds would be subject to destruction knowing everything we were taught or knew was proven not to be true.
@QuothTheRavenclaw11
2 ай бұрын
@@jasonryan9659Do you actually agree with everything Terrence Howard said?
@monkerud2108
2 ай бұрын
Wow, chill, i understand quantum field theory, and terrance is smoking his socks.
@joggingscissors632
3 ай бұрын
"How many times did he score a goal in the soccer game today?" "He scored once. One time." 1 goal, 1 time. Terrence: "That makes two." Golly, guess we need to call FIFA and change the records.
@J3Rfinisher
2 ай бұрын
😂 fucking hilarious 😂
@freindlyghost4829
2 ай бұрын
Time vs times makes the difference
@freindlyghost4829
2 ай бұрын
How many ones did you use for your answer? 😂😂😂 so using the number of 1 twice equaling one is beyond God like brain work sir.
@californiafarmin2145
2 ай бұрын
1 x 1 = 1 is equal to 1 = 1. In your chit example you are simply stating that one event (soccer game) had one player who scored a goal one time. The formulas for each are 1=1, 1=1, 1=1. Were two identical goals scored by two identical soccer players? If so, then, 1 x 1 = 1. Good luck finding a space and time bending machine to find two identical things of anything in existence. Peace
@chriskangiser1111
2 ай бұрын
Identical twins?
@cheapmovies25
3 ай бұрын
There's no way Joe smoked enough weed for that episode
@stevenlopez1st
3 ай бұрын
LMAF!!!!😂
@germtime
3 ай бұрын
Is he wrong?
@germtime
3 ай бұрын
Which part? Sound on point. Most of it.
@kidsmithree
3 ай бұрын
No he didn't, but Terrence smoked too much....
@patsox2004
3 ай бұрын
@@germtimeyea, thats how we do science. "It sounds good". Brilliant!!
Ya but Terrance knows that 45 degrees plus 45 degrees equals 180 degrees, which brings the sign right back to where it started as a multiplication sign. This means he was right all along to multiply instead of add…. This man is an absolute genius!
@devilseye361
2 ай бұрын
@@Sinnbad2145+45=90 bruh!
@J3Rfinisher
2 ай бұрын
Not if you look past the problem, like patch Adam's... when he saw 8 fingers instead of 4.
@cdubs5738
2 ай бұрын
I’m pretty sure it’s the wave conjugations are equal and opposite of the magnetism, which makes the void in the ether a no go, because quite simply there are no straight lines
@joshuadudley8031
2 ай бұрын
@@cdubs5738 No. It's because you are not multiplying volumetrically and using the correct angles of incidence, then you generate the right frequencies corresponding to the appropriate element in the periodic table. This is common sense man 🤦🏾♂️
@robertosantiago2508
3 ай бұрын
I like how he said I studied chemical engineering at SCSU but they don’t have a chemical engineering program at the university
@omgtkseth
2 ай бұрын
It's a freaking prank. It's a new age scam he and some ghost writers came up with and in a couple of weeks they´ll come clean and say it was a social experiment. And they're trying to figure out who picks up on what. The chemical engineering program is one thing, and other people will pickp up other stuff.
@SeC0nD_ChAnCE
2 ай бұрын
in is mind he did everything
@f4ttyfatfatcake
2 ай бұрын
Lol fr??? hahaaaaa sounds about right!😂😂😂
@vents2002i
2 ай бұрын
He's an actor 😆
@plat217
2 ай бұрын
What he means is he studied a book while drinking coffwe in SCSU
@alexmirrr
3 ай бұрын
I sell apples for $1 each, the buyer takes 1 apple, I'm like: you owe me $2 🧐
@Ily_anjurae
3 ай бұрын
😂 exactly! He's not making it make sense.
@kieror583
3 ай бұрын
What does 1 apple x 1 apple =
@Lip836
3 ай бұрын
Hajajaha
@reddasher3061
3 ай бұрын
gotta pay the tax lmfao XDDDD. its like when restaurant be showing the option of tipping on the credit card purchase.
@angelop.rodriguez6226
3 ай бұрын
@@kieror583 apple². Thing is you can add apples, so 1 apple + 1 apple = 2 apple, but you cant multiply them because multiply an apple by apple makes no sense.
@DemsRNutless
3 ай бұрын
I’m waiting for the South Park episode 😂😂😂
@jaebuchanan8712
3 ай бұрын
Bro😂
@beastmaster415
3 ай бұрын
When I first saw this video, that's exactly the first thought I had... "Matt and Trey are going to have a field day"😂
@DemsRNutless
3 ай бұрын
@@beastmaster415 Exactly!
@allisone4370
3 ай бұрын
That’ll be fun 😂🤣😂
@ikew6991
3 ай бұрын
It'll be epic
@PowerFromAbove
3 ай бұрын
When your uncle comes over after downing a bottle of wine and 2 Benadryls...
@karlopopovic810
2 ай бұрын
A bottle of whiskey more likely...
@user-kj6ne1dx3p
2 ай бұрын
He’s obviously not drunk. Are you?
@Cheeks63091
2 ай бұрын
😂😂
@SuperAgua
2 ай бұрын
@@user-kj6ne1dx3pagreed he's not drunk. But he is incredibly stupid.
@mamilafx1225
2 ай бұрын
😂😂😂😂😂
@BluGilTN
3 ай бұрын
It's so hard out there for a pimp, that they are turning to physics to make a living
@D1900fas
3 ай бұрын
Made up physics
@2008topshelf
3 ай бұрын
oh no you didn't. LOL.
@williamocean4723
3 ай бұрын
MANE!!!!
@NicholayN
2 ай бұрын
And they SUCK at it too 🤣
@NicholayN
2 ай бұрын
I'm starting to think the pimping ain't easy for a different reason... The math sucks!
@JapanSpr94
3 ай бұрын
Howard just gave a speech via video at Emory Law School for the US Patent and Trademark Office. I’m just now seeing all this about his research online. I am just in awe. I had no idea what he was talking about and now I see why. I’m no scientist but before law school I got a science degree. Now I understand why I didn’t understand him. It didn’t make any sense.
@TurdBoi-tf5lf
2 ай бұрын
😂😂
@nickmaths9187
2 ай бұрын
Generally, we tend to say that something doesn't make sense when we don't understand. I personally disagree with 1×1=2 but I'm still amazed by his bubble representation.
@swissaroo
3 ай бұрын
Let a x b = c; Square both sides gives (a x b)^2 = c^2; Expand left side (a x b) (a x b) = c^2; (a) (a x b^2) = a^2 x b^2 = c ^2; Divide both sides by b^2 gives a^2 = c^2 / b^2; Now let c = 2 and b =1 and take the Sqrt of both sides to solve for a That is Sqrt (a^2) = a = Sqrt (c^2 / b^2) = Sqrt (2^2 / 1^2) = Sqrt (4 / 1) = Sqrt (4) = 2, thus a = 2; Therefore when b = 1 and c = 2 then a = 2; Now substitute those values for a, b, and c into the original algebraic equation: a x b = c or in this case 2 x 1 = 2. Therefore, if 2 x 1 is 2 then 1 x 1 can not be 2. Conclusion Terrence Howard is WRONG and should find something else to do with his life! Fly fishing perhaps?
@freindlyghost4829
2 ай бұрын
Can you write a mathematical equation to explain how magic works or give us a formula that we can work with to explain levitation. Your 1 dumb smart guy times yourself😂😂😂😂
@freindlyghost4829
2 ай бұрын
Ok lets do this: if a camera captured a side angle of you looking into a mirror how many images of 'One' (as in person) would you see? Does it change the fact that is still just one person? So your sense of perception is off even by using all of that extra unnecessary stuff. 😂😂😂 goofy
@williamdavis8855
2 ай бұрын
@@Mathematica702this foolishness has nothing to do with a country.. this is an Actor.. we just had 2 high school girls in Louisiana find new theories independently and with 2 different processes!!! It was peer reviewed by Adult experts and it was real and accurate.. they are stars..
@swissaroo
2 ай бұрын
@@freindlyghost4829 You’re the goofball! 🤣 Try fly fishing next as you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. Silly boy!
@swissaroo
2 ай бұрын
@@freindlyghost4829 what’s your level of maths? First grade? 🤣🧮🤣
@xalian17
3 ай бұрын
"Breathing in and breathing out. The universe expands, but what about it breathing in?" -- This is the PERFECT example of Reasoning by Analogy instead of Reasoning by First Principles.
@Runthemjewels
3 ай бұрын
Thats… thats actually insane LMFAOOO reasoning with analogy can be useful in philosophy to elucidate moral truths and such… they are NOT useful in physics for determining how the universe works. Youre conflating analogy with thought experiment and even then, thought experiments are meaningless without data and research. You cabt just say “well people breath in and out, therefore the universe has to also expand and contract” -thats incredibly silly
@xalian17
3 ай бұрын
@@Runthemjewels exactly brother - dude is loco
@eltonjohn4239
3 ай бұрын
@@xalian17smh you buffons listened and believed in a man that sat in a wheelchair for 55 years, teaching you about physics, the cosmos and math... Couldnt talk , relied on a machine to do the talking for him and you fools believed everything that was coming out of that machine( no questions asked).... I realizer a long time ago that it doesnt matter what information is being put out there. If a Yt man isnt the voice of it, then there will be push back...even if hes crippled ,voiceless without any motor skill and plug up to AI machine. As long as he's Yt , you'd bite
@PrimalAscension
3 ай бұрын
He’s saying that not because it’s an analogy, he’s referring to how the universe mirrors the same structure in different scales, i.e. fractals, etc.
@kristofferbjrnstad3906
3 ай бұрын
@@PrimalAscensionplease watch professor dave video on howard and stfu. Or go study
@danzigvssartre
3 ай бұрын
He says, "if you have a 1 and then "add" a 1 with a multiplication sign, what happened to the one you added"???🤣🤣
@blackspirit1129
3 ай бұрын
multiplication sign is a mathematical expression. what if he used a different word instead of "add a 1".. semantics. guy needs to learn discrete mathematics, number theory, and such. but i doubt he will
@alexnowicki286
2 ай бұрын
@@blackspirit1129explain 3x1?
@stephenmahone4372
2 ай бұрын
Think about multiplication as a process... Takes the contents of a container and evaluate them using counting...So imagine you have a jar that has a number in it... something x something...( Some number of jars ) & ( some number of objects inside the jar)...So 1 x 1...( One jar ) & ( Some number of objects inside )...1 jar--1object_in_each_jar= 1 object....2jars--2objects_in_each_jar = 4 objects...3jars--1object_ib_each_jar = 3 objects...
@dankrigby5621
2 ай бұрын
@@alexnowicki286 just write it as a sum, that can be done with multiplication. so 3*1=(0+1+1+1). or rather the sum of 1, with the limits being 0 and 3. 3*1=(0+1+1+1)=3. its even still true if you multiply with other numbers. for example 3*3=9, or 3*(0+1+1+1)=(0+3+3+3)=9. the same can be done with 1*1=(0+1)=1. 3*1=3*(0+1)=3. it even works if you break it down further. 3*3=(0+1+1+1)*(0+1+1+1)=(0+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1)=9. just write multiplication as a sum so you cant be confused by the term "multiplication".
@vladotrajkovski9659
Ай бұрын
He basically explained adding 😅
@djangofett4879
3 ай бұрын
the dramatic mood music and motion graphics make this even funnier 😂
@user-vm3dd4yd2l
Ай бұрын
😂😂
@A6ics
3 ай бұрын
What is 1x0.1 terrence? What about 1x0.5, or even pretty wild 1x0.9? The answers are (0.1, 0.5, 0.9) how does 1x1 magically change the trend? Even use 2x1, it equals 2, how the fuck does 1x1 equal the same as 2x1?
@charleshorseman55
3 ай бұрын
He got you talking about it! (and me, talking about you talking about it) pretty clever I would say.
@sugarcookie8480
3 ай бұрын
And mr too!😂
@asdfg19923
3 ай бұрын
@@charleshorseman55 How is that clever? Or is this sarcasm
@soulcapitalist6204
3 ай бұрын
@@asdfg19923 There are people waiting for celebrities to lead their studies.
@user-yc1fz3vb5d
3 ай бұрын
2x1 should =4
@Malouco
3 ай бұрын
He said... "1x1 can be one if u only see it one time but as soon as u ADD the second one" He just said add another 1.... Your not adding another 1. The second one is describing how many times ur seeing the first one that exists. ITS A DESCRPTIVE NUMERAL SAYING HOW MANY TIMES UR SEEING THE NUMBER THAT ACTUALLY EXISTS.
@terirodriguez1363
3 ай бұрын
exactly… your taking the number 1 , one time. you get 1.
@GWAREBEL
3 ай бұрын
Take the 1 away from the equation and replace it with a cigarette. If you have 1 cigarette and MULTIPLY it by itself, what would you have? 2 cigarettes right? 🤔
@JODYKILLEM
3 ай бұрын
Then it shouldn't be 1x1...It should be 1x0 if we are only looking at the 1 exclusively 😂. Believe it or not T.Howard is correct...the minute you add a multiplying factor of another 1(1×1),it can't stand still because it's defeating it's own purpose of multiplying...
@musicplaylists64
3 ай бұрын
@@GWAREBEL That is not how cigarettes work sir
@musicplaylists64
3 ай бұрын
If you are not joking do you understand what a logical fallacy is?
@erikhansen5741
3 ай бұрын
I will admit he had me going for awhile but then I slapped myself
@Poussyeater-w5e
3 ай бұрын
Same here lol
@TetteyAddy
3 ай бұрын
😂😂😂😂😂
@drelurebanks6042
3 ай бұрын
You went back to sleep!
@saschaaegerter1784
3 ай бұрын
he'd get on really well with Deepak Chopra
@vdiddystudios8043
3 ай бұрын
I feel like some of what he says has merit but i cant tell i feel like im either too dumb to understand what hes saying or it makes absolutely no sense in general lol
@K4113B4113
3 ай бұрын
For those of you that are a bit confused about multiplication with 0's and 1's, here it's explained in easy to understand terms. How can 1 x 0 = 0? If you have 1 apple and give it 0 times to your grandma, how many apples did your grandma receive from you? She received 0 apples. How can 0 x 1 = 0? If you have 0 apples, and give it to your grandma 1 time, how many apples did your grandma receive from you? One again, she received 0 apples. How can 1 x 1 = 1? If you have 1 apple, and give it your grandma 1 time, how many apples did your grandma receive from you? She received 1 apple.
@universalimprovementtrust4737
3 ай бұрын
The multiplication operation of 1 multiplied by 1 resulting in 1 is a fundamental property of multiplication known as the multiplicative identity property. In mathematics, the multiplicative identity property states that any number multiplied by 1 will equal the original number. This property applies to all numbers, not just 1. So, when we say 1 multiplied by 1 is equal to 1, we are essentially stating that when you multiply any number by 1, the result will be the original number itself. This property helps maintain consistency in mathematical operations and is a fundamental concept in arithmetic.
@hugskisses1601
3 ай бұрын
So why do you think this man is trying so fervently to convince us we’ve been wrong all these years?! KZitem has helped me realize I haven’t been walking right, sitting correctly, and , of course, my misconception of basic mathematical principles!😂😂 God bless us all!😊
@bobbob1278
3 ай бұрын
@Horgan5905r Explain how 1x1 would give you 2? If you have a dog showing up one time, where tf do your get two dogs from? Is this an infinite dog glitch?
@hugskisses1601
3 ай бұрын
@@Horgan5905r I didn’t think I would hear anyone support this…wrong again!🤣
@johnathanmandrake7240
3 ай бұрын
You very word
@tonywells6990
3 ай бұрын
Now try and type that after smoking some crazy amounts of crack or whatever this guy is on.
@sivlap
3 ай бұрын
Sounds like Neil went into full Professor mode when reading TH's paper. Red pen??🤣🤣
@Rebelheart06
3 ай бұрын
Lol
@mr.knowitall6440
3 ай бұрын
He should've shredded it and sent back a bag of confetti... 🤨
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
was super generous and caring of him honestly. too bad old terry of the famous terryology is such a blind narcissist
Sometimes the professor runs into a student that knows something that he/she doesn’t know, and finds it hard to accept. This has happened all down through history. Does anyone remember Linus Pauling and vitamin C, and how he was trashed for years. I believe that instead of castigating the person we should research what he/she is proposing.
@dependent-wafer-177
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard and the ongoing debate: 1 X 1 = 2 Addition symbol sitting quietly in the corner: Oh so they've forgotten me already
@Chevyno10
2 ай бұрын
It was Einstein who said "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." Seems the haters and naysayers are unconsciously stuck in the same thinking that created this issue. Open mind, is a positive, progressive and necessary for advancement. Without Terrences 'attitude' and willingness to think for himself, outside the box and every inventor in history before him, we'd still be hunter gatherers. Consider that for a moment.
@thirdpointmedia
2 ай бұрын
Thinking outside the box isn't hard. Thinking well, thinking correctly outside the box is hard.
@EvolutionOfMan
20 күн бұрын
Exactly. It’s important to question all beliefs and assumptions. That’s what true science is supposed to be all about. Versus this modern day, scientism where people stay locked in a box of preconceived notions and believe them as if they were a religion, not to be questioned.
@joeuser633
19 күн бұрын
@@EvolutionOfMan The only people who believe that science is a kind of religion are the scientifically illiterate. Despite the commonly held belief, there definitely are stupid questions.
@saschas2531
3 ай бұрын
There is a confusion of the semantic English meaning of „multiply“ with the mathematical definition of multiplication. „To multiply“ in English means „to make more, to increase in quantity“. But that is not the definition of mathematical multiplication, which is simply a short form of addition to zero. The definition of mathematical multiplication of whole numbers A and B is: A indicates the number of times of B added to 0. If you apply this definition you arrive at 1 x 2 = „the number 2 added one time to 0“, 2 x 2 = „the number 2 added two times to 0“. You can of course just say, I am going to define multiplication the same way for all other cases but the number 1. But this is because you confuse semantics and mathematical operations. And you cannot have a unified definition of your ‚new‘ notation.
@foodchewer
3 ай бұрын
Well said.
@technoweasel8937
3 ай бұрын
EXACTLY, so you CAN'T by DEFINITION 'multiply' by ONE--- THAT is NOT 'multiplying'
@saschas2531
3 ай бұрын
@@technoweasel8937 you confuse the English meaning with the mathematical definition. The latter does not have to match you understanding of the English word ‚multiply‘. By the way, this confusion you have arises in English but not in other languages.
@chuichongo3898
3 ай бұрын
Energy times Energy,????
@oryxchannel
3 ай бұрын
@@saschas2531 lol
@oceancity5776
3 ай бұрын
1x2=3?
@Rob-wi3ir
3 ай бұрын
Hahaahaha, this was my first thought.....
@Hambeezy1111
3 ай бұрын
1*1=3
@joshuabloecker4364
3 ай бұрын
NONSENSE.
@kristofferbjrnstad3906
3 ай бұрын
Its more. Cause the energy of 2, is more than 1, so its actually 4. 1 is 1, and 2 is the doble, and 3 is tripple. Maybe its 5? Idk, i didnt learn howwiemath. I think the consept is that you can make it whatever you want. Just like a guy with a dick and boobs is a girl
@tims6966
3 ай бұрын
1x1=2
@sam2theammyk9
3 ай бұрын
2 groups of 2 apples is 4 apples. 4 groups of 4 apples is 16. 1 group of 1 apple is 1 apple. how hard is that? Draw circles for groups if you can't visualize it. If I deliver 5 pizzas to you 3 times today then you get 15 pizzas. If I deliver you 5 pizzas two times today then you get 10 pizzas. If I deliver you 5 pizzas one time then you get 5 pizzas. If I try to deliver you 5 pizzas zero times today (my car breaks down) then you get zero pizzas, not 5. Multiplication is how many times the event occurs, hence the x symbol.
@TheBoogieman32
3 ай бұрын
Group by definition is “more than 1”.. you can’t group 1, it’s just 1..
@MarcGyverIt
3 ай бұрын
From what I'm reading online in comments, apparently there are a scary number of people too stupid to grasp something so simple lol
@GIGSEASON
3 ай бұрын
@@MarcGyverItno you are too close minded and didn’t listen to the video lol
@tylero8595
3 ай бұрын
LOL yep. He doesnt understand simple multiplication. He is thinking too deep instead of just looking at the basic fundamentals of math. He's just dropping names. Nothing more.
@michael2305
3 ай бұрын
@@TheBoogieman32 1x1 = 1²
@BassByTheBay
2 ай бұрын
The 1 * 1 = 2 business is the very first thing in Howard's book, and he's demonstrably wrong from the get-go. He says: _If 4/2 is the inverse operation of 2 x 2 = 4_ _Then it would naturally follow that 2/1 is the inverse operation of 1 x 1 = 2_ But the inverse of 2 * 2 = 4 is not simply 4/2, it is 4/2 _= 2_ . *He left out the quotient,* and what that means is that the inverse of 2/1 = 2 is 1 * _2_ = 2, not 1 * 1 = 2. Squaring the denominator of a fraction is NOT how you derive its inverse. E.g., the inverse of 10/2 = 5 is 5 * 2 = 10, not 2 * 2 = 10. I.e., a/b = c is the inverse of c * b = a. His premise is false. Amazing that some people are buying what he's selling.
@Phillipe1969
Ай бұрын
Great explanation of the flaw in Terrence's logic in regards to 1x1. I applaud you. However, he is saying a lot more than that. He can be misguided on 1x1 and be correct on many of his other statements. No one is perfectly right or wrong. You have to discern each statement, to determine their validity. Most people are more interested and intrigued by his other statements and what he has actually produced; than just 1x1 = 2.
@BassByTheBay
Ай бұрын
@@Phillipe1969 For sure, but he chose to entitle his book "1 x 1 = 2", and he starts with that flawed premise as an argument for why you should trust him instead of well-established and proven math concepts. And he follows his "proof" with this on page 2: _"Dear World, I have been told by many that the releasing of this truth may pose certain challenges in my life. For there are many institutions that this truth will be viewed as disruptive to their system of profit and gains."_ So, he went all in on his flawed premise. That said, I watched all 4 hours of the JRE podcast with him and Eric Weinstein, and I thought Weinstein did a great job of pointing out the flaws while respecting the value he found. He rightly pointed out that some of Howard's ideas about engineering have merit but that Howard makes multiple claims related to math that are just patently false. When I first listened to Howard's ideas, his combination of word salad with his flawed premise made me dismissive of his ideas, but Weinstein's JRE appearance showed me that there were some small nuggets worth paying attention to.
@jetlorider
3 ай бұрын
The visual light spectrum only makes up 0.0035% out of the whole Electromagnetic Spectrum...we are still literally blind.
@scaledsilver
3 ай бұрын
its less btw
@zaccarman6683
3 ай бұрын
Ooooook that means we believe everything a dude dreamed and said on a comedians podcast?? I feel like everyone's forgotten Joe Rogan is a stand up comedian not the basis for science and fact. He just let's people run wild for the entertainment factor. Even he was questioning Terrence. He remembers being in the womb. That's INSANE talk. Also basically said he was Einstein in a prior life like dude is coked outta his gourd.
@adriansanchez5657
3 ай бұрын
He's Iron man
@alchemysticgoldmind4164
3 ай бұрын
@@adriansanchez5657No he is Tony Stark...No More Brilliant
@mandalorehamster
3 ай бұрын
Light and optics engineer. We have sensors for the rest of the spectrum. and we understand how light works pretty fucking well across the spectrum.
@xkafinybeyond8206
2 ай бұрын
In the equation 1X1, there is only one number there, which is '1'. The other is not a number, but rather an object in which the number of 1 is acting upon.
@ItsJennNotJenny
2 ай бұрын
Perfectly said
@drwzer
2 ай бұрын
The way I explain it to my kids: the number of things times the number of groups is the product, so one group of one thing is one.
@xkafinybeyond8206
2 ай бұрын
@SanityTV_Last_Sane_Man_Alive Well said. Set theory is one of the most interesting things known to creation. Thanks
Put aside personal opinions about what Terrence said, this is an incredible work of editing and narration. Amazing video!
@richspillman4191
3 ай бұрын
The patient died, but the operation was a brilliant success!
@herrh.5384
3 ай бұрын
His content ist still delusional and wrong😂
@riely
3 ай бұрын
@@herrh.5384 do cells multiply or add?
@herrh.5384
3 ай бұрын
@@riely there is no difference, multiplication means to add the numbers as often as the nominant tells you. 3x1= 1+1+1=3. 1x1 is the same as 1=1. you seem not to understand it either?
@riely
3 ай бұрын
@@herrh.5384 those are set values by a human NOT the universe
@reyalicea
3 ай бұрын
In mathematics, the number 1 acts as a multiplicative identity. This means that multiplying any number by 1 results in the original number itself. So, 1 * 1 = 1 because 1 is being multiplied by itself, essentially resulting in itself.
@the-matrix-ebook
3 ай бұрын
So then according to your logic of 1 being a multiplicative indicator 1x1=1 would have to be removed from multiplication, or stated as 1x1=x.
@kingdavid5525
2 ай бұрын
Terrence is saying that the word multiplication automatically means “more” than itself
@yeshuaistheway
2 ай бұрын
@@kingdavid5525agreed the definition of multiply is to increase. What he's saying makes sense.
@rorycannon7295
2 ай бұрын
@@yeshuaistheway how the fuck does a colloquial definition of "multiply" override mathematical axioms.
@light-rd7vq
2 ай бұрын
Hahaha so 2+0 doesnt equal 2 because the + symbol means you have to add something? Whats the definition of addition? You cant add zero? Also the definition of multiple is not increase more than itself. 4 X 0.5 = 2 which is a decrease genuis 😂😂😂
@bretteisan7630
3 ай бұрын
Holy smokes, we got actors trying to tell us our Bachelor degrees aren’t worth the paper they’re written on lol!! Any number multiplied by 1 equals itself..that means there’s only one number in the equation. If there’s a number multiplied by zero, then there is no number in the equation. Pretty simple stuff bro
@jairousparker2311
3 ай бұрын
BA's and BS's don't prove intelligence. They only recognize the fact that you invested time and money toward education. You graduate by passing the prescribed curriculum.There are masses of people that have been miseducated 🥸 and lied 🤥 to their entire lives by flawed systems designed by a select few. Some people like Terrence Howard are genuinely intelligent. They can analyze, research and test theories because of their interest in subjects. Just think 🤔of the 🧐 geniuses🤓 that decided to build some of our nuclear power plants near and on known earthquake fault lines.
@donmiller2908
3 ай бұрын
What irritates me is that astrophysicists who have studied the physical properties and behavior of celestial objects using advanced mathematical and scientific techniques to better understand the formation, evolution, and behavior of galaxies, stars, planets, and other celestial bodies have said Howard is mistaken in his black hole models. Yet laymen with the barest understanding of black holes are saying that Terrance Howard has advanced concepts that need to be considered. Why? because he talks a good line, like a good actor would.
@aundreamellado6112
3 ай бұрын
Breterson a lot of ur bsc is strit bull it not worth the paper its written on U are tought that current in a battery flow from positive to negative in Battery n that a total lie the hot leg of the battrey is negative nut an establush Right habd rules say uppersit that why all high diller car have Positive ground n some airplanes so with all the bs of ut bsc what is it worth look at medicine how much truth is tough to the young interns about diets and sude effect of pharmaceutical which meant poison why is it you need a licensed of drugs n poison to operate a pharmacy n a Barr or a spirit licenson
@dependent-wafer-177
3 ай бұрын
@@donmiller2908Laymen are persuaded by charisma, scientists are persuaded by evidence.
@mr.knowitall6440
2 ай бұрын
Yes, but if you had imaginary, honorary Doctorate Degrees in Afrophysics and Quantum Equity, you'd understand it all very clearly... 🧐🤔🤯
@curanderoverde
3 ай бұрын
1 x 1 = 1 regardless of how much Ayahuasca you're drinking
@OMOninja
3 ай бұрын
Yea says the one who's speaking outside their azz
@threepercenter0377
3 ай бұрын
But, there is no spoon... 1 is merely a construct of consciousness. Everything is a wave, separated by awareness. We're splitting hairs and calling it science, politics, religion, etc.
@richhylton
3 ай бұрын
Read the proof. And think. How does a single cell instantaneously multiply into 2? Like an embryo growing to 2x then 4x etc cells into a baby? There is a higher dimension an octave above that brings physical things into existence. This channel has other videos breaking this down. (I think there was an experiment with cancer cells and how they manifested in a group of women. Anyway, the higher dimension manifests the “gravity”. Gravity is not a result of physical mass, like previously believed. We now know it can be revered at local points. It’s connected to the electrical field that joins the dimensions. Go read the proof and see how it leads to explanations of many phenomena unexplained or poorly explained because the Aether was removed from equation. The math and science we’re using is based on a 2D flat Cartesian model BECAUSE the early philoso-scientists believed the earth/universe was FLAT. Lookup flower of life, also read the proof for 1x1. Good stuff
@andreroy8141
3 ай бұрын
The X in the equation means to multiply the said object. You can't have it both ways. You could say 1 always equals 1 and can't be divided. However in science we know that's also false. Hence the term Division Wave Multiplexing. This type of technique enables bidirectional communications over a single strand of fiber and it's commonly known that anything can be divided.
@vagabond6308
3 ай бұрын
@@richhyltona single cell doesn’t instantaneously multiply into two it undergoes mitosis, which occurs after a series of cellular functions that prepares the cell for mitosis. DNA is replicated in S phase and other important cell growth occurs during the G1 and G2 phases. Then chromosomes compact, the nuclear lamina breaks down, the mitotic spindle forms, and microtubules pull the chromosomes apart as an actin contractile ring separate the two cells in cytokinesis. No need for higher dimensions here, just explainable physical phenomena.
@storyjoy143
3 ай бұрын
I've attempted to read the draft of your book. The first page says, "If 4/2 is the inverse operation of 2x2=4, then it would naturally follow that 2/1 is the inverse of 1×1=2". Some literature for you: If four items are split into two sets, then two sets remain that have two items. An independent number of items are subsequently subtracted from my field of vision, memory, relevance, etc according to the number of instances I have observed the number of items. So yes, if I see two items and at one point decide to categorize them, then notice another instance where i have categorized what happen to be another two items, I would reflect that the number of times I have categorized items in a set, there happened to be four total items between the two times I have applied them to some category. Two items "split" into one group still provides the observation of two items. One item observed as one set in one instance does not yield two items. It yields one item in one set, once only (or perhaps since I just said "one" three times, then that means 1x1x1=3). You have grossly misconstrued the context of value. Value is not doubled in the same way between an item added to an item and a set being added to an item. This is why multiplication does contain the process of addition, but repeatedly. If it only happens to be repeated one time, then the expression of this observation ensures accuracy of both the quantity of the item and the quantity of repetition that the item is observed. Moral of the story: I have waisted a few precious minutes of my life to learn by the first page that yes, you are actually serious.
@ainnochaim9450
3 ай бұрын
You "attempted to read" it?
@curiouscat8396
2 ай бұрын
Oh, I see, he is reasoning by some weird anal/ogy! "Since 4/2=2*2=sqr(2)=4, then 2/1=1*1=sqr(1)=2"!? But then he turns around and says (that) sqrt(2) is not 1 butt 2!? Oh, now he really is just taking the piss.
@lotusphoenix8
2 ай бұрын
@@ainnochaim9450 Bravery
@lotusphoenix8
2 ай бұрын
* wasted
@BassByTheBay
2 ай бұрын
I couldn't believe that what you quoted was actually what he wrote because it's so mind-numbingly ignorant, so I looked at his book's first page... and there it is 😳. I'll offer an even simpler explanation than you did. His whole premise is wrong. The inverse of 2 * 2 = 4 is not simply 4/2, it is 4/2 _= 2_ . *He left out the quotient,* and what that means is that the inverse of 2/1 = 2 is 1 * _2_ = 2, not 1 * 1 = 2. I.e., a/b = c is the inverse of c * b = a. Incredible that anyone would take this guy seriously.
@philipgilliam3400
2 ай бұрын
It’s funny that in this clip Terrence Howard says we never breathe in twice before breathing out. But we do, and we do it very often. It has a calming effect, taking us out of the sympathetic nervous system’s fight or flight mode and into the parasympathetic nervous system. According to Dr. Andrew Huberman it’s what’s called, “the physiological sigh”.
@dreparker9686
3 ай бұрын
If you start the equation wrong "1x1 = 2" it's all downhill "Wrong" after that. If I needed to drive South to Benson St. but I went north, there is no way to get there unless I turned some corners (back tracked) or drove around the World to get back to that point. which would be unnecessary.
@AsliceofWisdom
3 ай бұрын
Its amazing to me that people can hear how eloquently this man speaks and how he quotes his knowledge but still want call him crazy. Just goes to show most people have never had an original thought in their lives everything has been told to them
@AsliceofWisdom
3 ай бұрын
@amirparsi4165 If all you got from Terrance was his controversial statement of 1x1 not being 1 just shows how little intelligence you have yourself. If you listen and do research into what he is talking about you would be amazed. But you probably haven't learned anything outside of mainstream academia
@thomsonmidzi
2 ай бұрын
You get it too.
@Thomas-vd7ez
2 ай бұрын
What's so eloquent about what he says? I with my master's degree on engineering only keep hearing links between concepts that have nothing to do with eachother and drawings of geometrical shapes without any meaning, let alone any real world application. You are such a troll
@yeshuaistheway
2 ай бұрын
Your right
@silvaskiproductions3937
2 ай бұрын
I agree. Terrence should be president, he is the leader that America doesn't know it needs to bring it back to its former glory.
@moe_bee
3 ай бұрын
hmmm... Multiply is just adding sets of numbers instead of adding individual numbers.... If he wants to define the relationship of numbers in some new way, that's fine, call it "Terrenceification "or something. But, it's not multiplication.
@joshuabloecker4364
3 ай бұрын
This is only for real values between 1 and 2. DOES IT MAKE SENSE that multiplying them can NEVER even get to 2?
@joshuabloecker4364
3 ай бұрын
I AM WAITING. Also, since these are REAL VALUES b/w 1 and 2, it's odd that they CAN never be more than their totaled sum right? GENIUS?
@joshuabloecker4364
3 ай бұрын
I mean now, since the math on them works; still can't get them always over the totaled sums, but there are several to try - YOU CANNOT get less than them added, not all of them are them same as when added YOU TRY IT - GENIUS take your armchair - GENIUS! and YOU CANNOT get them to 4. WHAT IS 2 x 2? And 1. anything but 0'z to infinity, ANYTHING is more than 1 -THNKING? SO IT NEVER MAKES SENSE that multiplying VALUES -get what math represents, GENIUS - that are over 1 and less than 2 cannot reach even 2! GET THAT?,
@FearRua
3 ай бұрын
@@joshuabloecker4364 WTF are you talking about, You can't even form a comprehensible paragraph how do you think you understand math. 2x1=2 you can test multiplication. Take 10 blocks put them in a row then take blocks and 9 more down from each row now you have 10 blocks across and 10 blocks down. 10x10 is 100 you have 100 blocks, count them its 100. now take 2 blocks and and go 2 blocks down 2x2 is 4 count them its 4 blocks. Now take 1 block 1x1 is 1 count the blocks, its 1 block. This how multiplication works and how we know 1x1 is 1 not 2.
@joshuabloecker4364
3 ай бұрын
1.81 x 1.54 Next step: .181 + .154 = 3.35 But the calculator, right? & this is only for values b/w 1 and 2 - it will always work better than saying multiplying in this case means never even get to two. WHEN ADDING gets you past 2. GET IT. NO. IT IS NOT "multiplying is adding"; it's a more logical answer.
@mikul2646
2 ай бұрын
0:53 as soon as I saw "remember the basic laws of common sense", I knew it was over
@freindlyghost4829
2 ай бұрын
Meaning what???
@rorycannon7295
Ай бұрын
@@freindlyghost4829 "common sense" is literally just people's feelings that they cant justify with logic.
@Hunterdivine
3 ай бұрын
If 2 x 2 = 4, meaning two, two times is 4, then 1 x 1 = 1 is because one, one time equals, one. Theres only one, it doesnt get multiplied. One, one time is one. Two, two times, is four.
@Puppy__Nietzsche
3 ай бұрын
Yes. I agree but that doesn't fit within the laws of mathematics.
@EIRW1Z
3 ай бұрын
You are not wrong here. However, what TH is trying to explain is that our current definition of multiplication is incorrect, or incomplete. Don't think of the x, shown in 1 x 1, as TIMES as in, 1 set of 1. TIMES should only be used when observing physical objects, as a way to describe how many of something there are. It's a statistical function. Multiplication is a short-hand way of showing addition. Therefore, you should be able to get the same answer from both multiplication and the relative sum, or addition. The original Latin definition of 'multiply' is 'to increase'. So, if we were to say "1 'increased by the magnitude' of 1", this would equal 2 because it is inherently the same as 1 + 1, (1 x 1 = 1 + 1). With this definition everything else in the multiplication table gives the same answers we already know, apart from anything multiplied by 1 or 0. An example would be, "1 'increased by the magnitude' of 0", which would give the answer of 1 because it is not being increased and is fundamentally the same as 1+0 (1 x 0 = 1 + 0). Currently, you can take any other number in the multiplication table, convert it to a sum of addition and it works, apart from anything multiplied by 1 or 0. For example, 3 x 3 = 9. As an addition sum this would be written as, 3 + 3 + 3 = 9 (3 x 3 = 3 + 3 + 3). We know that 1 + 1 = 2, so why does 1 x 1, not equal 2? It's because our current definition is incorrect/incomplete.
@LlonirTS
3 ай бұрын
@@EIRW1Z The multiplication operation of 1 multiplied by 1 resulting in 1 is a fundamental property of multiplication known as the multiplicative identity property. In mathematics, the multiplicative identity property states that any number multiplied by 1 will equal the original number. This property applies to all numbers, not just 1. So, when we say 1 multiplied by 1 is equal to 1, we are essentially stating that when you multiply any number by 1, the result will be the original number itself. This property helps maintain consistency in mathematical operations and is a fundamental concept in arithmetic. Thinking math has to follow grammar is a linguistic fallacy. Linguistics and mathematics are two different domains.
@EIRW1Z
3 ай бұрын
@@LlonirTS I fully understand the concept of the multiplicative identity property. I'm also not disagreeing with it. It works for certain applications, such as statistics, as I already mentioned. What I do have a problem with, something you have also clearly failed to recognise, is that, at some point, someone had a thought, then spoke the multiplicative identity property into existence. So, in reality, linguistics has everything to do with mathematics, as does thought. Also, the multiplicative identity property does not apply to other numbers, it only applies when multiplying by the number 1 and also 0. So it does not provide consistency at all. If it were consistent, it would apply to all numbers, would it not? Seems strange to me to have a universal rule for 1 thing and not the others. Unless, it is so that observable objects can be grouped together to be counted, which makes it a statistical principle and also the reason the concept was created in the first place. Perhaps, then, it should be separated from all other mathematics and only apply when observing for statistical analysis.
@johnathanmandrake7240
3 ай бұрын
(1 x 1 =1) = (1 = 1) It's strange to look at. Kind of like the whole dividing by zero conundrum. Every other multiplication of itself is a growth except this one.
@phfj123
3 ай бұрын
T Howard is getting the concept of addition and multiplication confused. 1x1=1, 1X2=2 , 1X3=3, 1X20=20, 1X50=50, 1X100=100, 1X1000=1000. In this world when the system of multiplication was setup the 1st rule was that anything times it self (which is 1) will be itself. So technically multiplication doesn't begin its usefulness until a number is being multiplied by 2 or greater. Even 0 X 1 = 0, In short anything times 1 is a mirror of itself. So maybe taking 1 out of the multiplication system will help Mr. Howard.
@hansoerteras3983
3 ай бұрын
Thats more like i understand it. 1x1=1 isn´t wrong, its just pointless. Multiply anything with 1 is simply pointless, so when he says it shouldn´t be part of the multiplication table, he isn´t wrong. It shouldn´t be because its a waste and serves no purpose. Doesn´t really harm someone either i would like to say, but i am not so sure anymore considering Mr.Howard. 1x1=1 has seriously confused him it seems. The conclusion that 1x1=2 though, that makes no sense to me at all.
@phfj123
3 ай бұрын
@@hansoerteras3983 I agree. Have you ever heard a music band singer say "Hit me 1 time"? They are asking basically to have 1 of something done 1 time. So lets say the drummer will hit the drums 1 time, not twice. So, 1X1 =1 not 2 Mr. Howard...lol
@10thlaw
3 ай бұрын
By that explanation I understand how 0x1 = 0 but wouldn’t 1x0=1 ?
@phfj123
3 ай бұрын
@@10thlaw In basic multiplication it doesn't matter if the positions are switched. The results will be the same.
@frenchiebouba
3 ай бұрын
@@10thlaw i give you 1 bag of 0 lolly= You have 0 Lolly. I give you 0 bag of 1 lolly= You still have 0 Lolly I give you 1 bag of 1 lolly= You have 1 Lolly I give you 2 bags of 1 Lolly= You have 2 lollies I give you 1 bag of 2 lollies = You have 2 lollies I give you 2 bags of 2 lollies= you have 4 lollies 3 bags of 3 lollies=9 lollies 4 of 4 lollies=16 lollies 4x5=20 1x0=0, 0x1=0, 1x1=1, 1x2=2,2x1=2, 2x2=4 etc......
@saltybrackishfresh
Ай бұрын
He’s clearly speaking in terms of analogy and it’s actually a decent thought if you evaluate it. People are quick to jump on something if it makes them feel smart debunking it. Every single adult that can drive understands why 1x1=1 But if you interpret the question differently in speech or writing then it is interesting to WHY it is
@joeuser633
19 күн бұрын
No it isn't, it's just stupid.
@paulvalliere9355
2 ай бұрын
I like turtles
@tresaS58
Ай бұрын
Me three
@sunlightsage2982
3 ай бұрын
He’s an actor, not a scientist. Please keep that in mind when taking unsubstantiated claims at face value because he just sounds like he knows what he’s talking about.
@TheBeanGreen
3 ай бұрын
But he doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about. He sounds like a bipolar egomaniac with a god complex.
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
@@TheBeanGreen yes, but to people with below average or possibly even average IQ he sounds smart. these kind of people will just recoil and double down in their beliefs if you tell them they're wrong. I mean that's why their so dumb in the first place. It's better to try to lead them into finding the answer on their own, and if that doesn't work, just try to say it very nicely.
@Urtongueizursword
3 ай бұрын
Why can’t he be both an actor and scientist 😒 stupid goofy
@RochusMr
3 ай бұрын
An actor with patents and a you who has none of that is the smart one. Are from Col0rad0? We hear the “grass” is great over there 😂
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
@@RochusMr "with patents' lol....
@guygore3794
3 ай бұрын
I just imagine that after Terry gave his treatise to Tyson, he followed Tyson into the restroom only to find his treatise floating in the toilet before proceeding to beat up Neil.
@RomesKing
Ай бұрын
Half the people in the comment section disrespecting Terrence never even heard of Erwin Schrödinger before this clip.....😂😂😂
@astronomicalreason9807
23 күн бұрын
Anybody old enough to drive knows about the Shrodingers cat thought expirement. If you're trying to use that as an example of how Terrence is correct then you need to go get re-education.
@MCLottotv
13 күн бұрын
@@astronomicalreason9807Terence has patents and copyrights to his ideas and you don't. Hmm! Who should I trust you or Terence?
@thizlam4810
3 ай бұрын
“Multiplication means to make more and increase in number” Umm, no? Multiplication is counting groups of numbers. 1x2 is saying 1 group of 2. 2x2 is 2 groups of 2, and so on. This man doesn’t even understand basic algebra and people saying he’s right are also idiots.
@user-ev4xd4nf2g
3 ай бұрын
Ngl ur comment reminded me how dumb i am
@meztv8602
3 ай бұрын
You don't call someone an idiot because he has an opposing view. It's his view. Respect it. That's what scholarship is all about. Every scholar has had a thesis thrown out, not because they are idiots but they couldn't convince others. Some thrown out views came back to be the accepted view.
@HiddenBush64
3 ай бұрын
@@meztv8602I would bet my life that this is a view that will never be accepted. What he is encouraging is dangerous behaviour; don’t be angry when people aren’t happy with his bullshit.
@Btheonly33
3 ай бұрын
@@HiddenBush64DING DING DING RIGHT ANSWER!!! 💯💯 TOXIC POSITIVITY is fking up the world
@fultonvrental
3 ай бұрын
@@HiddenBush64na metztv is right dude this has happened throughout history time and time and again. I wouldn’t bet your life on it. They would’ve bet their life that the earth was flat not too long ago, or the possibility of talking to someone miles away through electromagnetic waves in the air
@amylarsen3961
3 ай бұрын
He may not be right about 1 x1 =2. But that doesn’t mean everything else is wrong. We need people that think differently to figure out problems we haven’t been able to solve before. Am I right? Regardless of right or wrong this man should not be criticized. We need people to be able to speak freely about their ideas of how to solve problems so that someone who has the answer isn’t scared to speak up.
@LlonirTS
3 ай бұрын
Agreed. I'm more interested in his computer simulation that can accurately predict planetary and galactic models using his lynchpin theory. Specifically, I'm curious if the code uses 1x1=2 as a logic structure. If not, separate the wheat from the chaff and keep moving forward.
@khaledisanerd
3 ай бұрын
This is almost laughable Any number multiplied by 1 will give you that number right?? 2 * 1 = 2 4 * 1 = 4 And so on So why does that have to change just because the number being multiplied is 1 Also, multiplication basically just shows you how many time a number appears in the answer like 4 * 2 = 8 Because 4 appears in 8 two times 2 * 1 = 2 Because 2 appears in 2 one time So by that logic, 1 * 1 = 1 Because 1 appears in 1 one time. As simple as that
@defrank1870
3 ай бұрын
People are getting stuck on that, but what you really need to understand is what he was getting at. NO ACTION OCCURS IN ETHER. There's ALWAYS a REACTION. So with one action, there's actually TWO. With electricity, there's magnetism. When you breathe in, you have to. breath it. When you stretch a rubber band, there's forces trying to draw you back in. When you throw a ball, gravity pulls it down.
@El-Duererino
2 ай бұрын
@@defrank1870Those are explained by different equations 🤡
@meilei8716
2 ай бұрын
The red lining reminds me of when I was preparing my capstone for my undergrad. It’s just a person who’s helping you clarify your ideas and create more accuracy in your discovery and entire point to follow. Little things become big things. I wouldn’t take that for granted.
@dirtabd
3 ай бұрын
Neil said Terrence needs a prescription for lithium.
@the-matrix-ebook
3 ай бұрын
Definitely not cool. Ad hominem attacks are low class.
@benjimc1
3 ай бұрын
This is the problem with Neil, he is too arrogant, he could have talked to Terrence and spent time with someone who had a genuine interest and actually educate him, instead he just wanted to say he was wrong and stupid and don't waste my time... Damn shame
@dirtabd
3 ай бұрын
@@the-matrix-ebook Just like your Mom!
@dirtabd
3 ай бұрын
@@benjimc1 It's our job to put stupid people who never actually did the work in their place. If not this country fails to dumb like so many in history have already. Do you go and see your mechanic every time you get sick too? If you actually study mathematics you'd know Terrence likely suffers from mental illness cuz he sure aint talking any sense with 1 x 1 = 2. Even my friend with down syndrome thinks Terrence is mentally challenged. Definitely intelligent enough to regurgitate some lines, but has zero idea how insane he sounds or wtf he's talking about. Has he submitted his findings for peer-reviewed science? yes and no. 100% of them said its nonsense and gave evidence of how and why. Its available for study. He's just taking advantage of the new-age people who are staring at a glass of water thinking they can change it to wine because theyre looking at it with pure abundant belief. "What the bleep?" was like 20 years ago and still MFers trying to profit from it instead of getting a job. If Terrence just took a college Geometry I course he'd learn why those shapes and the mathematics that first defined them have existed since the Greeks. They werent trying to unlock some alchemical magic from these shapes, its the mathematic principles and equations that gave life to them. They were defined from the nature the math was made to represent. No magic necessary. He could have just read up on Pathagorys and he could have learned this himself if he had any ability to question and call out his bullshit like scientists excel at for a reason. That is why Im leaning toward mental illness because he's been coddled by Hollywood so long he can fathom that he could just be full of shit.
@the-matrix-ebook
3 ай бұрын
@@dirtabd She might make ad hominem idk I’ll have to ask her if she cussed out anyone lately. Most likely so.
@FreeTimeMastermind
3 ай бұрын
Using this allegedly flawed science were able to push a 141 metric ton object into space. Can't wait to see what we achieve with "Terryology".
@Liquidcadmus
3 ай бұрын
we've never been into space. the official narrative of space being a vacuum is already a ridiculous and impossible concept
@Poundz978
3 ай бұрын
Maybe the methods we are using are obsolete in comparison to the possibilities of Terrences discoveries.
@MarcGyverIt
3 ай бұрын
@@Liquidcadmus No, it's not, it makes perfect sense.
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
@@Liquidcadmus it's ironic you say that when there's a very high chance you utilized a satellite to post that comment... a satellite you can actually go out and observe right now if you have the equipment and use a little bit of that "misguided math" that has increased your lifespan and is allowing you those first world comforts with that smartphone lol.. you people are something else. can't believe humans can be this dented.
@OMOninja
3 ай бұрын
basic entropy technology PRODUCING MORE HEAT THAN PRODUCTIVE ACTION, that's a result of Euclidean Thinking !
@kennahowe7582
3 ай бұрын
We complicate everything. We changed the 13 month / 28 day lunar calendar to the 12 month/ each month has a different number of days Gregoroan calendar. For what? Just so that someone can attach thier name to it and get credit for it. I'm going to find and read his treatise this week. Very interesting stuff!
@MariaAdukeAlabi
3 ай бұрын
I have been into this 13 months calendar investigation for a long time. Gathering information. And I believe this is something that needs to be rectify too to get us into the normal cycles of nature. Any important source of info in this matter that you can share with me?
@benvinar2876
3 ай бұрын
They got rid of it to remove your consciousness away from the cycles or patterns of life.
@daleculbertson6862
3 ай бұрын
Look up the 432 vs 440 tuning issue and decide for yourself 👍
@CamCrumer
3 ай бұрын
you people are proof how uneducated the average person is. Everything is not a conspiracy
@gosey318
3 ай бұрын
Facts
@tylerpan5447
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard totally lost it when Tony Stark let Don Cheadle test drive War Machine
@afro208
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard did indeed apply for three patents in the United States. However, none of these applications resulted in granted patents. It’s worth noting that the patent filing process doesn’t verify whether the invention works or makes sense; it simply ensures that no one else has claimed the same patent before. So, filing a patent doesn’t necessarily mean the invention is valid or functional. Some of Howard’s patent applications may have been filed under the name “T. Dashon Howard,” and a few of those applications were granted.
@Coinmancer
3 ай бұрын
I had some dude literally tell me that the patent office tests out these patents and they must work in a lab before the patent is granted hahahahahaha
@spikenomoon
3 ай бұрын
Its rigged.
@soulcapitalist6204
3 ай бұрын
@@spikenomoon Howard describes patenting like he was scammed by an invention promotion or patent company for over a quarter million $.
@spikenomoon
3 ай бұрын
@@soulcapitalist6204 No doubt. If this was true he would own Fox.
@visualosity7116
2 ай бұрын
All he did was patent the shapes. If you look at patent law or guidelines. You don’t need testing or even a prototype. You just have to have an idea that’s new, useful, or statutory. All he did was not prove a theory correct, he just patient those shapes and models.
@THE-END-OF-WINS
3 ай бұрын
The way they’re treating Terrence. Howard is how they treated Dr. King in his prime. He died. Then he got his holiday. To challenge the status quo makes you a madman.
@danedormio
3 ай бұрын
Being delusional makes you a madman.
@Melsmom
3 ай бұрын
sir stop. putting terrance howard in the same sentence as Dr king is insane !
@claresseromero3576
3 ай бұрын
Don’t breed.
@keylime6
3 ай бұрын
As a grade 12 student, literally all of these “scientific ideas” are completely unrelated and it’s hilarious 😂. He is trying to justify his ego and cult with science but the science is made up, his ego and cult are real.
@user-em7ht4ke9n
3 ай бұрын
As a 12 grade student, you know shit lol. Stfu and go study some gender studies in college... I'm sure they will gladly steal your money
@aldunlop4622
3 ай бұрын
Exactly it's like a regurgitation of "sciency things', complete gibberish.
@drelurebanks6042
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard is right!
@aldunlop4622
3 ай бұрын
@@drelurebanks6042 Nice one troll.
@keylime6
3 ай бұрын
@@drelurebanks6042 bait
@live_laugh_shrek
2 ай бұрын
As a chemist I gotta say the term “it’s a lie” is so important. Science isn’t the key to everything…it’s us just trying to understand the world around us. Someone who read a 101 level book who thinks that they know everything is literally the opposite of what we call the principle of science.
@KojiLocks
3 ай бұрын
this video is so well put, thank you so much for your hard work !
@1LIFEtoWIN
3 ай бұрын
Scientists and researchers have to have their stuff criticized when it’s peer reviewed, by Terrance Howard calls it “attacking”.
@Poundz978
3 ай бұрын
Peer reviews usually have logical rebuttals that confront the idea head on and not attack the studies it may have been inspired from or whom
@scaledsilver
3 ай бұрын
💤💤💤💤 you're so braindead you got me falling asleep
@ryang2723
3 ай бұрын
Scientist don’t waste their time peer reviewing the incoherent ramblings of narcissists. Dudes gonna break an arm jerking himself off.
@hraughr
3 ай бұрын
Howard is what an inspired person with just above average intelligence looks like, it's enough to fool and connect well with average people, but makes actually intelligent people roll their eyes
@keithjohnson1641
3 ай бұрын
He has over 90 patents, I think he knows what he's talking about
@keylime6
3 ай бұрын
If any of you Terrence followers can answer this numerically, I will be amazed. If the square root of 2 is 1, what is the square root of 1?
@NickCharming
3 ай бұрын
Vertices, times, multipy
@keylime6
3 ай бұрын
@@NickCharming that’s just a bunch of math vocabulary, not an answer
@PuppetMasterdaath144
3 ай бұрын
Its an abstraction not empirical reality, your point is beyond moot
@PuppetMasterdaath144
3 ай бұрын
every comment is something like: if you have a dog, and you multiply with your mom
@Redbird1504
3 ай бұрын
Obviously it's 42.
@GLASSB182
3 ай бұрын
Bruh, he really thinks multiplication automatically means "more" without thinking how it can be less, for example, 1×0.5 ... Which equals *drum roll* 0.5, which is less. SHOCKER, I know. Here's something else. Take your answer 0.5 and add to the 0.5 in the problem, and you end up with the 1 you started! Wow, it seemingly balances, doesn't it?!
@eastafrika728
3 ай бұрын
Terrence is very correct, in quantum physics, 1x1=2, as much as it = 1, it's called quantum entanglement.
@albaus
3 ай бұрын
And I fought my teacher early 90’s that 1x1=2 because I’ve learned in my dreams that it was but I couldn’t explain exactly how and why, she then said that I could learn in advanced math that it was a possibility but for 2nd grade purposes I needed to engrave in my mind that 1x1=1 as an absolute truth to pass on my tests lol
@eastafrika728
3 ай бұрын
@@albaus western education is mandatory indoctrination
@eastafrika728
3 ай бұрын
@@albaus take into account that 1 is not just +1 but -1, on the number line from zero left and right. So 1×1 is not just +1 but is also -1, which makes 2 from 0, but also makes 0. 1=2 =0, which satisfies quantum mathematics, a wave is a particle, and nothing is something. Self identification is to exist independently, all senses lead into one identity, you. Every object is a separation of one original object. Mathematics is the study of 1 or one line as everything, a particle, center of gravity of oxygen, a black hole.
@eastafrika728
3 ай бұрын
@@chadbreton4951 whenever you see comments like yours, it's always an uneducated European. Ok, smart boy, prove where I'm wrong, we'll wait and see.
@eastafrika728
3 ай бұрын
@@chadbreton4951 see, just like I thought, white man with no answer, just hates that others know what he doesn't know. Welcome to reality where the white man doesn't know everything.
@elliotpolanco159
3 ай бұрын
Fascinating I can listen to Terrence all day. He needs an audio book.
@IfaKslays
3 ай бұрын
I agree!!! I’d learn all types of cool things just to listen to him😂
@armandomorelos2500
3 ай бұрын
He's saying nothing but bs haha
@elliotpolanco159
3 ай бұрын
@@armandomorelos2500 & you're speaking like a jackass. Terrence knows what he's talking about, better him talking about physics than Hollywood filth.
@bobwesley4634
3 ай бұрын
he needs a mental institute, this guy is fucking insane !!! please go watch professor dave explains, terrence howard is a complete narcissist, don't fall into that trap also please. You are brighter than that !!! he uses hundreds of complicated words and sentences to make it look like he knows what he is talking about but when you really decompose it and look for what the words he is saying means, you realize how much bullshit goes out of his mouth.
@Milarz
3 ай бұрын
He misunderstands many critical scientific issues. He conflates ideas and areas of science that are not directly related. Much of it is just pseudoscientific gobbledygook or supernatural assertions. And lastly, there is no such thing as "wave conjugations" and straight lines were not an outcome of a belief in a flat earth.
@nothingtoseehear5012
3 ай бұрын
00:35 His grammar is a generated construct. Linked in incomplete sentences. Caught in the tragedy of the American education system.
@auuuzz
3 ай бұрын
true datt
@Nerdiness1985
3 ай бұрын
You can't blame any education system for this level of drug induced mental illness fueled by utter stupidity. This is mental masturbation fueld by cocaine, adderol and an internet connection.
@2008topshelf
3 ай бұрын
and the chasm created between that and superstardom.
@black__monk400
3 ай бұрын
Okay scholar 😂
@leostitch6541
2 ай бұрын
Wait until he discovers the power of zero.
@jamesford7422
3 ай бұрын
Some of you are way overcomplicating this and I lost all respect for Terrence watching just 5 minutes of this. The "x" multiplier is NOT an additive function! That is what "+" is for!!! Think of it this way: 1 apple x 1 apple eaten= 1 apple eaten. If I eat 1 the apple (the first 1 in the equation) ONE time (the second one in the equation), how many apples have I eaten an APPLE? By his logic I would have eaten the one apple twice. IMPOSSIBLE!!!!
@tripttwe
3 ай бұрын
This is excellent video editing!
@voidzennullspace
3 ай бұрын
From a mathematician's perspective it is because 1 is the multiplactive identity of the real numbers. This os basic abstract algebra...Let "e" denote the identity of a group with operation "°". Let "a" be an element within this group. Then we have a°e=a, e°a=a, e°e=e. There are many more properties, but these are the relevant ones. So take the real numbers (the group) under multiplication (the operation). Let "a" be an element of the real numbers. Then a×1=a, 1×a=a and 1×1=1. I mean, sure, you could rewrite your definition of multiplication if it doesn't make sense to you.....but then youd have to rewrite group theory and abstract algebra...not so easy to do especially since it explains why all of these operations work the way they do!
@hugskisses1601
3 ай бұрын
KNOWLEDGE!🙏😁
@ryanmccarter9859
3 ай бұрын
Thank you for this CORRECT answer.
@DRMcG-F
3 ай бұрын
😂😎🙏😉👌
@johnathanmandrake7240
3 ай бұрын
What. 1 x a =1a?
@voidzennullspace
3 ай бұрын
@@johnathanmandrake7240 1 times anything (in this case "a") is just that something (again, "a"). 1 x a = a.
@justinrides3635
3 ай бұрын
Dude got fired from ironman for trying to get paid twice.
@childofkhem1.618
3 ай бұрын
I see people taking a very strong stance on this guy. Some absolutely despise his theory and others think it's the new era of terriology. There is a middle ground here. He's obviously smart and he has admitted that his whole theory comes through intuition and not classical education. This makes the academics furious and the spiritualist rejoice. Maybe he has some useful, applicable knowledge but needs to be mentored by someone who can fill in the gaps of his intuitive knowledge. Maybe they can convince him he's completely wrong. But let's give it a break for a while and let it play out before we judge either way.
@Sonotbearface
3 ай бұрын
I agree, I'd love to see him sit down with some major high level intellects
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
Well, when you read the ones praising him, and notice they all have terrible grammar and names like "lashandawilliams345", you can clearly see the situation that's going on.
@Hamromerochannel
3 ай бұрын
I think at first I saw him with ridicule on the basis of basic arithmetic. But as I watched the video, the guy is talking abbout balancing act. Making for each one (force, entity in the universe) there has to be another balancing one, hence 1*1=2. He further adds, the universe is not expanding but there is another force which is balancing it. He uses this analogy to justify 1+1 or 1*1 both equals 2. Assumptions can be dangerous sometimes. I think despite crude or not, there might be some merit on what he says.
@timothylee8711
3 ай бұрын
@@Hamromerochannelthe growing lack of faith in logic and science is profoundly confusing to anyone with a brain
@dokkencrouse6998
3 ай бұрын
If you're wondering where straight lines hide in nature- it's in Crystals.
@MarcGyverIt
3 ай бұрын
His point of there being "no straight lines" is stupid, he added "in nature" to make it sound more complex, even though it means nothing.
@BrainWorm4president2024
3 ай бұрын
😢😢
@gsmith8403
3 ай бұрын
So under a microscope the crystal would form straight lines?
@ZenoKarma0070
3 ай бұрын
It means everything. That's why there is two different numbers for pi , Einsteins with the curve of the glass and DaVinci's pi before they made America. If you learned facts of history in America, you should stop arguing all the time and unite. Seriously come TO,GET,HER or learn to swim. The country is drowning in debt...
@iamledgend247
3 ай бұрын
Where ? Because Raw Crystal's Are Curved
@SingaporeanInKorea
2 ай бұрын
I dunno... is it really necessary to have so many rotors on a drone when 3 or 4 is enough?
@johndisoto3782
3 ай бұрын
If you think this guys bad, Radiohead can’t even count to 5, they believe that 2+2=5 get a load of that math.
@alexgreen3662
3 ай бұрын
The comment section is always the best, never fails to disappoint 😂 I love how everyone suddenly is a mathematician, scientist or physicist…
@kitcat-nm9zd
3 ай бұрын
if I have 3 5 dollar bills I have 15=,3*5... if I give u 1, you have 5 dollars 1*5 =5.. not even up for debate I have 1 dollar bill I have 1 dollar 1*1=1
@nilsolsen8727
3 ай бұрын
Typing this after I just said the same.thing to play devil's advocate. Why would you say you are multiplying 1 and not getting more of it?
@altnarrative
3 ай бұрын
Yes that’s an axiom to work from. Another is 1x1=2.
@TheBee444
3 ай бұрын
Your logic is flawed. If you gave me 1 5 dollar bill, I got 5 dollar. There’s therefore no need to introduce 1 in the sequence anymore. That’s the whole point of the debate. If 1x1=1, why have it in the table since the table is all about multiplication? If I also got $1 & multiply it by 0, I still got my $1, since 0 ain’t providing any multiplication. This goes beyond science, it requires human intelligence & balance of objectivity.
@TrueAnarkii
3 ай бұрын
He mentioned that listen to him.
@scaledsilver
3 ай бұрын
where in nature is it just 1. Tell me the equation to the atom, its surely not just "1" or is it a different number? notice how you used a currency explanation. You're so brainwashed by materialism 😈
@franklacour5656
3 ай бұрын
I think he's on to something they want regular people to know
@KingACO999
2 ай бұрын
I have the same feeling. He has either discovered something that they dont want us to know or he is almost there
@carsythe
2 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard is more attracted to the conspiracy theory than the physics itself
@randomguy3080
11 күн бұрын
If you have 1 group and 1 group consists of 1 apple, you only have 1 apple, if you have 2 groups, and each group consists of 1 apple, you have 2 apples, if you have 2 groups and a group consists of 2 apples, you have 4 apples, I have simplified it for him
@Atomicbubble1
3 ай бұрын
People are hung up on the 1x1 thing, but the rest of what he’s saying regarding geometry and it’s ability to harness energy is spot on. In 500 years we will look back on todays math/physics and laugh at how wrong we were. There is much beyond our senses, harnessing the metaphysical is the real next break through. Funny how everyone attacks these ideas now, but no one pauses to think about how Galileo, though correct, was sentenced to death because people simply couldn’t see beyond the current paradigm. History repeats itself.
@rupakrokade
2 ай бұрын
The improvements in the world of Science you see are done by the people who have balls of steel to test their theory and make numerous attempts to disprove it before saying "I have done it". Einstein who accidentally predicted Dark matter before it was discovered, named it as a blunder.. and here you see a guy who is conveniently making blunders and seeking shelter under the names of great people of Science. This is arrogance and irresponsibility.. this is not how Science progresses.
@astronomicalreason9807
23 күн бұрын
That may be true, but in 500 years 1×1 will still equal 1.
@dmusovic
3 ай бұрын
We're all wrong.
@oneofthelastsurvivingdoges8832
3 ай бұрын
The real answer
@lordmaximus4602
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard Trolling NEilTyson is funny as hell
@nashkita77
3 ай бұрын
How can 1 multiplied by 2 be 2, and 1 multiplied 1 also be 2???
@army3820
3 ай бұрын
That’s what I say but hey I’m nobody 😂’
@scaledsilver
3 ай бұрын
the atom is 1.618 not 1. now go do 1.618 in a calculator. you're welcome - jinnha
@goranceros
3 ай бұрын
He said that 1x2 equals 3, and 1x3 equals 4 etc.
@MarcGyverIt
3 ай бұрын
He seems to think that saying "times" means something other than "how many times" lol He's got a good memory, but he's not very bright.
@scaledsilver
3 ай бұрын
@@MarcGyverIt 1.618.
@saltybrackishfresh
Ай бұрын
Terrance’s book is actually fascinating! Most people hating on him can’t even understand the basis of their conversation
@Slow-Biden9
3 ай бұрын
Bro has a messiah complex BAD
@MikeSmith-ib6ke
3 ай бұрын
The presentation of this video is awesome
@richspillman4191
3 ай бұрын
Click bait, the title is misleading, nothing was explained.
@MlNOOOOR
3 ай бұрын
LOL he did explain it. 1x1= 1 fails to multiply. And personally i think he's right. To multiply is to make more.. 1x fails to do that.
@richspillman4191
3 ай бұрын
@@MlNOOOOR Therein lies the error, it is 1, 1 time. Not multiple times, just once.
@rogerskate101ps3
3 ай бұрын
You don’t get it then
@charleshorseman55
3 ай бұрын
@@MlNOOOOR Regardless, he used this concept to get you to respond. Perhaps he has a point, perhaps he hasn't even understood his own point. But here we are. Trying to figure out if 1x1=2. Dude's smart.
@MlNOOOOR
3 ай бұрын
@@charleshorseman55 Well, this 1 times 1 is making us all mis the point. Dont you guys understand he's trying to say, that there are ways in this universum where u can create generators with free energy etc. If this man is right, there wont be Laws of thermodynamic and alot of other laws...
@user-mw6tq2nq2e
3 ай бұрын
The "particle physics is all theoretical" comment highlights a critical misunderstanding in what it means that particle physics is theoretical. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have practical applications. It has a very important practical application, which is internet, computers, phones, any device, etc.
@UFOCurrents
3 ай бұрын
Once once, is one. 1 x 1 = 1
@MikeBTek
3 ай бұрын
At 9:16, Howard shows a page from his book. It says "Allow me to Enlighten you. If 4/2 is the inverse of 2x2=4 then it would naturally follow that 2/1 is the inverse operation of 1x1=2" Right there Howard makes a mistake. He says that 4/2 is the inverse of 2x2=4. Notice how on the left side he only shows two numbers 4 and 2, but on the right side he shows three numbers, 2, 2, and 4. To be more correct Howard should have written 4/2 = 2. Now in math the number being divided is called the dividend, so 4 is he dividend. The number we are dividing by is called the divisor, so 2 is the divisor. The number that is the results or answer is called the quotient, so in this case the quotient is 2. So we have dividend 4/divisor 2 equal quotient 2. The inverse of this operation is the divisor x quotient = dividend, so we have 2 x 2 =4. Now we apply this to Howard's "2/1 is the inverse of 1 x 1 =2." First we add what Howard left out, namely 2/1 = 2. Now we can say that the inverse of 2/1 = 2 is 1x2=2. That is the divisor 1 times the quotient 2 is equal to the dividend 2. You see Howard start his elementary error by saying that 2/1 is 1, when correctly 2/1 is 2. From that point on he continues his parade of simple and suspicious math errors. Howard continues to hide certain things conveniently. Notice on that same page he has headings for Division, Addition, Subtraction, and Multiplication. Notice how Division is the only one that does not use number equations. He does not want to write out 2/1 = 2 because that would contradict his 1x1=2, so instead he says "The number two is divided by one, twice. Then on the next page Howard says that "2/1 is inconsistent with 1x1=1," again conveniently leaving out that 2/1 =2 for the third time. Makes Howard's whole reasoning suspicious.
@diegoisaias5795
3 ай бұрын
I loved "DeGrassy Tyson" the moment I heard it and I'm never refering to him in any other manner.
@davidhooper259
3 ай бұрын
NGT is a shill. He has not published in years. He mocks far more than he understands. He attacks what has never been or can be challenged mainly because they are theories without presenting his own. He is the mouthpiece of the demagogy of “science”…even disciplines he has zero business talking about. Let the weird theories be tested and the truth will sooner or later show itself.
@KS-yy2cp
3 ай бұрын
😂😂
@Mr.Honest247
3 ай бұрын
Ok then.
@elsesoon
2 ай бұрын
Terrance Howard not knowing how a decimal works makes me a genius
@IfaKslays
3 ай бұрын
I’m officially in love with Terrance Howard 🤤 no shade, but I didn’t realize he was so freaking intelligent!! 🤯
@Julianklaus
3 ай бұрын
Would you spread your cheeks for him ??
@armandomorelos2500
3 ай бұрын
He spitting bs lmao listen to an actual mathematician or scientist. This guy hasn't studied shit in math 😂
@MarcGyverIt
3 ай бұрын
He's literally stupid. Actually stupid.
@thimsile
3 ай бұрын
Why crazy cults exist, exhibit A
@dooganwang
3 ай бұрын
You misspelled schizophrenic.
@TheAspiringMeFHE
3 ай бұрын
Essentially he’s saying why would we need to indicate 1 x 1 instead of just saying 1.
@michaelstone3463
3 ай бұрын
There are many instances where one might need to multiply two expressions, each of which reduces to 1. And you need to get that result correct! IT IS *NOT* "2". Just wait until he discovers that you can multiply times *fractional* numbers and get LESS than you started with. I guess that such basic arithmetic will blow his mind. Multiplication and division are the same exact thing--one can be converted to the other. They're just different ways of expression. By the way, having a patent doesn't mean that "it works"; it doesn't mean that it has value, and it doesn't mean that it's valid. But if you have the time, the money, and want to protect an idea nobody's interested in, you can still get a patent. Or 97 of them. It doesn't justify, validate, or vindicate your "work".
@TheAspiringMeFHE
3 ай бұрын
@@michaelstone3463 I get you, but to be specific. Why do we need to indicate the equation “1 x 1 = 1” any other number I’m with you. But it’s a waste of breathe to even say 1 x 1 equals 1.
@user-kp6eu9fl1r
3 ай бұрын
I knew my LSD trip had some truth😂
@vyasiyer2887
Ай бұрын
WHERE THE FUCK DID 1x1 = 2 become about the "ETHER" dawg I think he genuinly went insane
@youtubeblockedme5864
3 ай бұрын
One is God's number... There is only one and one magnified by itself will still always be one.. it's spiritual. The one would need to split AKA division for it to become two
@qianabrown3662
3 ай бұрын
1÷1=1
@youtubeblockedme5864
3 ай бұрын
@@qianabrown3662 think about Cellular division... It starts with one.
@johnjeremynorman4891
3 ай бұрын
The split is not a complete split…. The split holds a place of tension at a 1/3 rd balance point and the trinity of this new fractal of consciousness is both individual and part of the one thing at the very same time….. embrace the paradox!
@BronzDano
3 ай бұрын
Look, I’m no scholar, I’m not very well educated nor do I have a solid grasp on mathematics. I say that to say this. This sounds very compelling, and it has piqued my curiosity, one thing I think Terrance has misunderstood is 1x1, it can’t equal 2 because it’s just another way of saying “ 1 one time” 5x1 is 5 one time….everything else he is saying sounds interesting nevertheless. I hope the academic community at large soak it up, pull it apart, confirm or deny what works and what doesn’t, use what does, toss what doesn’t. But I don’t think he should be written off without throughly examining every aspect til exhaustion.
@humanbean3
3 ай бұрын
you and everyone that says this, say it because indeed you are not educated. anyone educated realizes how silly it is. he's not even presenting any facts or data or findings of experiments.. nothing. it's philosophy. this is not science.
@Knight766
3 ай бұрын
Professor Dave has already dismantled him and Oxford laughed at him, for good reason. The guy is a nutcase as many actors are.
@gavinminty4974
3 ай бұрын
He’s demonstrating the disconnect between the word picture and the math tables. Math is an expression of a philosophical concept. If you change your verbiage to his model suddenly more concepts are easier to digest. In finance we do math the way he does. If I took money and returned the same amount and told ppl I multiplied it once they’d be pissed. Unless they see a 100% return which is now DOUBLE their return … I didn’t multiply anything.
@TheKingterri
3 ай бұрын
I agree. If my teachers explained mathematics in the manner Terrence is attempting to convey, I probably would have turned out better😂
@danedormio
3 ай бұрын
Why should the scientific community examine his ramblings, because he's crazy or because he's famous?
@KenKammal
3 ай бұрын
It's like Jazz Music... They took it and created sheet music out of Jazz music... when in fact true Jazz Music is played in the Gaps.
@user-hy9nh4yk3p
3 ай бұрын
All on a backdrop - or Space of silence - which precedes and 'ends' the music and weaves throughout. Fare thee well - in life's journey.
@giustinoscalise3177
3 ай бұрын
You can transcribe Jazz. Individual performances vary based on style of improvisation based on the chord movements and the players involved. Any individual performance can be transcribed. It's still time, chords, notes, key signatures, modes, and scales. it's not mysterious. Also, what's true Jazz? Wes Montgomery? Miles Davis? Allan Holdsworth? Jon Benjamin? Me playing the theremin with my dick?
@richspillman4191
3 ай бұрын
More like scat
@user-hy9nh4yk3p
3 ай бұрын
@@richspillman4191 Ooh - it is a valid art form (jazz) - it could be considered noise - by others. I do not know - what Mr Howard thinks and so, we are left - to our own perspectives - as always. Very clever - comment - actually. Tra la la ... Fare thee well - in life's journey.
@richspillman4191
3 ай бұрын
@@user-hy9nh4yk3p We try to make it interesting.
@joeuser633
19 күн бұрын
It all depends on how big the first 1 is as compared to the second 1. Assume the "ones" we are talking about are logs. If the first log was 10 times bigger than the second log then the natural log rhythms would be in a completely different key and you would have no way to get a new key made at Home Depot. Nobody even mentions this.
@J-Mark444
13 күн бұрын
I’m following you his perspective isn’t as far out as some are making I’m just not in that field to know if that math can even be questioned but it’s not far fetched when you can think outside the box a little bit
Пікірлер: 6 М.