Is there any possible way of making 2+2=5?

Is there any possible way of making 2+2=5?

@sarah and @vrinda : Very Interesting. And this is where iota concept is useful. See,
2+2=4
49/2+9/2=4
Therefore Manipulating LHS:
(49/2)^2^1/2
Therefore,
(a^2+b^22ab)^1/2
((1636+(9/2)^2)^1/2)9/2
=((20+(9/2)^2)^1/2)9/2
=((2545+(9/2)^2)^1/2)9/2
=(5^2  2.5.9/2 +9/2^2) ^1/2 9/2=(59/2)^2 ^1/2 9/2
=59/2+9/2
=5
Eq With RHS=4
5=4=2+2:)

@sarah Let 2 = 2.5, then 2+2 = 5

*listens to the facepalm of many many dead famous mathematicians *

@maverick832 said in Is there any possible way of making 2+2=5?:
You're a genius, you should scam people!
2+2=4
49/2+9/2=4
Therefore Manipulating LHS:
(49/2)^2^1/2
Therefore,
(a^2+b^2+2ab)^1/2Assuming a = 4 and b = 9/2, (ab)^2 = (a^2 + b^2  2ab) = (16  36 + (9/2)^2)
((1636(9/2))^1/2)9/2
Ahah, the sign in front of the (9/2) should be positive (and it's missing a square which you correct in the follow line)
=((20(9/2)^2)^1/2)9/2
=((2545(9/2)^2)^1/2)9/2
=(5^2  2.5.9/2 9/2^2) ^1/2 9/2Assuming you meant =(5^2  (2x5x9)/2 "" (9/2)^2), the factorization should yield =(5^2 (2x5)(9/2) "" (9/2)^2), which is not (59/2)^2 = (5^2 (2x5)(9/2) + (9/2)^2); the sign on the (9/2)^2 being the issue
=(59/2)^2 ^1/2 9/2
=59/2+9/2
=5
Eq With RHS=4
5=4=2+2Rest is history :)

@iammale It wont get you to 4=5, But the other way does. Well who knows, maybe 4=5 and this whole world is going crazy after all Neglecting Mathematics. I love it to solve these problems. On a serious note though if you do plot a Graph, I dont know how we could get 4=5 with this equation. We could plot it for: y=(ab)^2. See where a=5 and b=9/2. Without considering iota, just hand plot it. Results would be amazing.

No, there isn't, because if you do indeed manage to find a way, then you made a mistake somewhere.

my head hurt from reading the converstion between the guys (im pretty sure those two are) below. yes there is a way for 2+2 to become 5... just add freaking 1. you said "making" not proving that 2+2 is 5.

based,on pure math i dont think it is possible

Well if one of the couple isnt wearing protection, then šš»āāļøš

@iammale You were Right. I dont like it to do on Computer, this Maths. So I corrected it and it was just one only. The sign before 9/2 should be positive before squaring. So that is it, and it still yeilds, 4=5=2+2

@maverick832 And The rest is History NOW. And I dont SCAM people in MATHS Atleast, but I love doing it in real life. ;)
And Identify the problem now. Still there is one. But mathematically saying the solution is purely correct now.

@maverick832 You mean the 9/2 on the outside that was supposed to be +9/2?
Or do you mean the part where I reveal the secret to this trick where you basically kill the negative sign that comes from (49/2) = 0.5 by squaring the (49/2)^2^(1/2) = +0.5 without accounting for complex numbers (i)

@IAmMale See the solution. Corrected it.

@iammale And The Hint is Squaring a negation is never a problem, rooting it is. I will tell you a problem with my method, umm well its not mine though, my teacher got it to us in 8th Standard. The problem is, I considered only one root :) Buddy.

@maverick832 Yeah you corrected it at the last step, that's why I didn't point it out previously.

@iammale So got the problem?? But you agree right that mathematically its correct ;)

@maverick832 Lol you just said the problem here is you didn't account for the second root, I was referring to complex numbers as a way to track the negative root.

@maverick832 said in Is there any possible way of making 2+2=5?:
@iammale It wont get you to 4=5, But the other way does. Well who knows, maybe 4=5 and this whole world is going crazy after all Neglecting Mathematics. I love it to solve these problems. On a serious note though if you do plot a Graph, I dont know how we could get 4=5 with this equation. We could plot it for: y=(ab)^2. See where a=5 and b=9/2. Without considering iota, just hand plot it. Results would be amazing.
I would like to quote here that there are some things in world even Mathematics feels powerless. I keep it to God.

@maverick832 Same way we obtained pi. Through Integration. But we did not account for many values, and that is why pi is irrational though 22/7 is purely rational