1 2 3 1 12 Proof

If you d like to work through the details of the proof on your own.

1 2 3 1 12 proof. This false proof relies on dividing both sides of an equation by zero disguised as a b whereas you can divide both sides of an equation by the same thing only as long as you are not dividing by zero. People found the idea so astounding that it even made. The particular proof as offered in the video is certainly open to question even if the end result. The euler maclaurin formula bernoulli numbers the zeta function and real variable analytic continuation by terence tao.

John baez september 19 2008. A recursive evaluation of zeta of negative integers by luboš motl. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2. However the method assumes a superior complexity when applied to it.

1 12 is a mathematically legitimate thing to write down for the following three reasons. A b a 2 ab a 2 b 2 ab b 2 a b a b b a b a b b b b b. I m sure it s not perfect but the flaws are beyond my mathematical abilities to recognize. Recently a very strange result has been making the rounds.

Similarly every sum used in the proof is conveniently converged with the help of this method even the final sum 1 2 3 4 1 12. Maths then the answer to this sum is 1 12. We can say 1 2 3 1 12 by retrofitting the analytic continuation of a function to its original infinite series. But what about the proof s use in string theory that i mentioned in the prelude.

Euler s proof that 1 2 3 1 12 by john baez. In any case i m willing to believe 1 2 3 4. The idea featured in a numberphile video see below which claims to prove the result and also says that it s used all over the place in physics. Keep reading to find out how i prove this by proving two equally crazy claims.

The proof in the video requires that firstly we accept that the infinite summation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2.