Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: -1 x -1 ?
Replies: 29   Last Post: May 13, 2009 9:01 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Peter Percival

Posts: 339
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: -1 x -1 ?
Posted: Sep 18, 1999 8:45 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply





Dale Henderson wrote:

> In article <937516347.13527.0.nnrp-14.c2debf68@news.demon.co.uk>,
> "Guillermo Phillips" <Guillermo.Phillips@marsman.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> > Hello All,
> >
> > Here's something I've always wondered (perhaps in my naivety). Why
> > should -1 x -1 = 1?
> > I appreciate that lots of nice things come from this, but what's the
> > fundamental reason for it?
> >
> > Guillermo.
> >
> >

>
> I've seen a few proofs on this thread that make unfounded assumtions.
> One assumes the uniqness of inverses and another assumes 0x=0.


<cut>

Well, we won't get far without "unfounded assumptions" will we? I assumed
we were working in a ring in which my "unfounded assumptions" do hold.

<cut>I've tried to assume only the axioms of a Ring...







Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.