Terrence Howard at Oxford - Crank Alert

Neddy Bate

Neddy Bate

Valued Senior Member
Warning, major crank alert.

Terrence Howard is an actor who also happens to have his own cranky ideas about mathematics, including the idea that 1 multiplied by 1 should not equal 1 but rather 2. Yep, you read that right. Apparently he is one of those who, having never understood a particular subject, decides to re-invent it his own way, and of course, name it after himself, Terryology. That alone is 20 points on the crackpot index!

And for some unknown reason he is giving an address and Q&A session at the Oxford Union. The full 52 minute Youtube video is below.


I almost wasn't going to post this, because it made me cringe, and I know that other people who have any understanding of maths and physics will have a similar reaction. I apologize in advance.

But it is interesting in some ways, such as his ability to 'almost' seem like he knows what he's talking about. It is also revealing that he starts off by trying to say that he is self-taught as an actor, but instead ends up revealing that basically he is a good bullshitter.
 
If Wikipedia is to be believed, he might earn some additional crackpot points for claiming to hold a PhD when he really doesn't:
On February 26, 2013, Howard said on Jimmy Kimmel Live! that he had earned a Ph.D. in chemical engineering from South Carolina State University that year. ... However, he never attended the university and in fact the university is not empowered to confer doctorates in chemical engineering.
Click to expand...
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Howard#Personal_life

It's quite saddening to see a person with such access to education still being a product of failed education.
 
"How can it equal one?" he said. "If one times one equals one that means that two is of no value because one times itself has no effect. One times one equals two because the square root of four is two, so what's the square root of two? Should be one, but we're told it's two, and that cannot be."
Click to expand...

o_O

There are no words...
 
mathman said:
I did not watch the video. I presume if everyone ignores it, it might go away.
Click to expand...

Good idea. I watched the whole thing for some giggles, but at times I wondered if it was worth it.
NotEinstein said:
If Wikipedia is to be believed, he might earn some additional crackpot points for claiming to hold a PhD when he really doesn't:

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Howard#Personal_life

It's quite saddening to see a person with such access to education still being a product of failed education.
Click to expand...

If so, I think that shows that he either has delusions, or at least is quite comfortable with the idea of BS'ing people.

gmilam said:
o_O

There are no words...
Click to expand...

I know, right? I don't remember if he made the error of claiming, "They say sqrt2=2 but that can not be" in the above video, but he did make it in the Rolling Stone article that you are quoting. But he definitely made the 1x1=2 claim in both places. Ugh.
 
What Mr Howard is getting wrong about one times one is really trivial. I can illustrate this with an easy example.

Suppose I have a basket with apples in it. If I take two apples from this basket, I've taken two apples once. If I repeat this I've done it twice.
So I have either two apples "once", or two apples "twice", i.e. I have two or I have four apples.

If I take one apples once, I don't have two apples (!). This guy is deluded about how to combine numbers (and numbers of things like apples, or whatever).
I wonder if he realises he is one person "once", i.e. not two people, although that possibility must follow from how he thinks multiplication works.
Actually he would be an infinite number of people because he can multiply himself by one an unlimited number of times.
 
He has a point. It's got me thinking that since 55 is fifty-five and 44 is forty-four, shouldn't 11 be onety-one?

Also zero is a plural since we say 2 pizzas or 10 pizzas but only 1 pizza yet we say 0 pizzas. So 0+1=>3
 
Musika said:
Also zero is a plural since we say 2 pizzas or 10 pizzas but only 1 pizza yet we say 0 pizzas. So 0+1=>3
Click to expand...
I'm having far too much trouble trying to parse that. I guess zero is a plural since 0 = 0 + 0 + 0 + ... = 0 x 0 x 0 x ...
That can't be true for any other number.
Quite how that possibly leads to " So 0+1=>3 " I can't imagine.

However, 1 x 1 is one, taken once (or one time, or "times" one). One one is one, two ones are two, says the times table. Can you remember learning the times table?
He has a point. It's got me thinking . . .
Click to expand...
No, it hasn't.
 
arfa brane said:
I'm having far too much trouble trying to parse that. I guess zero is a plural since 0 = 0 + 0 + 0 + ... = 0 x 0 x 0 x ...
That can't be true for any other number.
Quite how that possibly leads to " So 0+1=>3 " I can't imagine.

However, 1 x 1 is one, taken once (or one time, or "times" one). One one is one, two ones are two, says the times table. Can you remember learning the times table?No, it hasn't.
Click to expand...
Can please explain all this in pizzas?
How do you distinguish zero pizzas from zero nanchos?
Actually even anything more than 1 pizza is a plural since we say 1.25 pizzas ... so it should read 1+0 = >1.

This may not be true with nanchos since nanchos simply increase in size the more you add to them. If you are careful, you can even eat someone elses nanchos and it will not be apparent. So nanchos can be infinite since they always exist in a state of plurality ( 0 nanchos, 1 nanchos, 2 nanchos, 3 nanchos etc).
 
Last edited:
arfa brane said:
No. Sorry, I can't be bothered.
Click to expand...
Then I guess you can't have your cake and eat it since, mathematically speaking to render a cake impossible to be eaten would mean .... hey I think I also stumbled on to something else !!!
 
Musika said:
How do you distinguish zero pizzas from zero nanchos?
Click to expand...
You have made a grammatical error, due to a hidden feature of English - zero is plural of course, as you can see from "zero pizzas", but nachos is singular (like "hummus", which is not one hummu plus another hummu, or "grass", which is not one gras after another). So you need to write "zero nachoses". That's also why you can't eat somebody else's nachos - there is only one on the table, and if you ate it it must have been yours.
 
Ah yes, grammar. A cursed beast if ever.

A man walks into a bar and sits down; bargirl walks over and says, "What you 'avin, sir?". He says "No drinks, thanks luv".( that's 0 times she has to bring a drink over!).

Two men walk into a bar, sit down; girl comes over, "What you 'avin, sirs?".

. . . A mathematician walks into a bar, sits down. When a young woman approaches him to inquire as to his need for a bevvy, he responds: "Thankyou, but I require less than one or more drinks, namely zero drinks. I'm just waiting for a friend, who I'm sure will want one or more drinks, one drink at a time of course."
 
Last edited:
. . . The young woman walks off, thinking to herself, "So when his friend arrives, I'll be serving him one drink at a time, every time I bring one" (she ain't half clevver this one), "That's one drink times one . . . time."

Brilliant
 
arfa brane said:
. . . The young woman walks off, thinking to herself, "So when his friend arrives, I'll be serving him one drink at a time, every time I bring one" (she ain't half clevver this one), "That's one drink times one . . . time."

Brilliant
Click to expand...

And if the three of them go to her place for frivolity she needs to work out the going rate of sex with one (at a time) or both (at same time) and track each one who does it ...... nope anything after that we are into quantum mechanics Terryology

:)
 
Terry Howard walks into a bar. The bargirl says to him, "I'm sorry but if you order one drink, I'll get totally confused about how many times I'll need to bring it over! Best you order lots of drinks, then we won't have a problem when you start multiplying them by one."
 
I read a little bit about this guy. He is nuts. He is also a very violent bad man.

I hope his cazy 'math' occupies so much of his time that he doesn't have time to beat up women.
 
Musika said:
He has a point. It's got me thinking that since 55 is fifty-five and 44 is forty-four, shouldn't 11 be onety-one?

Also zero is a plural since we say 2 pizzas or 10 pizzas but only 1 pizza yet we say 0 pizzas. So 0+1=>3
Click to expand...
You are thinking outside the boxes,even if you do seem to be a bit of a numpty one.:wink:
 
Musika said:
Then I guess you can't have your cake and eat it since, mathematically speaking to render a cake impossible to be eaten would mean .... hey I think I also stumbled on to something else !!!
Click to expand...
Sure you can. Take your piece of cake, break it into crumbs. Then break those crumbs in two. You now have twice as many crumbs. Eat half of them and you are left with the same number of crumbs you first got from your piece of cake, so you still have your piece of cake.
 
Does he explain what 1 x 2 = ? What about 1 + 1 ? I'm ordering nachos and I can't figure out how many I need! My best guess right now is onety one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top