It's only true in boolean algebra. But why is that? At what point does that break? What is special about real algebra that breaks that rule?
2026-03-26 19:02:07.1774551727
Why is the distributive law, $A+BC=(A+B)(A+C)$ not true in real algebra?
582 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in BOOLEAN-ALGEBRA
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- Put $f(A,B,C) = A+B'C$ in $Σ$ $\pi$ notation
- Definition of Boolean subalgebra
- Steps to simplify this boolean expression
- When a lattice is a lattice of open sets of some topological space?
- Boolean Algebra with decomposition property
- Simplify $(P \wedge Q \wedge R)\vee(\neg P\wedge Q\wedge\neg R)\vee(\neg P\wedge\neg Q\wedge R)\vee(\neg P \wedge\neg Q\wedge\neg R)$
- $B$ countable boolean algebra then St(B) separable.
- Who is the truth teller (logic puzzle)
- How to prove this Boolean expression?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
If you had both distribution laws, you would be able to prove:
$$\begin{align} a + bc & = & (a + b)(a + c) \\\\ & = & a^2 + ab +ac + bc \\\\ a & = & a^2 + ab + ac \end{align} $$
for all $a,b,c$. It should be clear that this places a severe constraint on how the operations and the elements can behave, and so there must be very few systems that can do it.
It should not be surprising that the real numbers happen nor to be one of these very few systems. The real numbers form a field, which is itself a very severe constraint. The combination of the two constraints rules out almost every possible system. In a field, if $a = a^2 + ab + ac$ then (unless all three are zero) we can divide by $a$ to show that $1 = a + b + c$ for all $a,b,c$, and perhaps you can see how this system is so constrained that it applies to very few actual problems.
There are many other elegant symmetries not possessed by the reals. For example, in some systems (even some fields) one has $a=-a$ for all $a$; the reals are not one of them.