So, I woke up at 3 AM last night and could fall back asleep. I ended up going down a rabbit hole of YouTube videos regarding Terrence Howard and his claims that he has invented a new kind of math. He claims 1X1 = 2 and the square root of 2 = 1. Despite watching a dozen videos of him explaining his theories, I still can't figure out what the hell he is talking about, but I don't know that I've ever seen anyone display their total stupidity with such confidence. Here is an example from Joe Rogan:



There are dozens of examples of him going onto these different shows and talking about his amazing new math, and I haven't found one example yet where someone calls him out (to his face) on being a dumbass. He is amazed that the square root of 2 times 2 equals the square root of two cubed. That seems like basic math to me, but no one ever points that out to him.

He is so confident in his stupidity that I think he must be doing a bit. Maybe he's doing some sort of major method acting like Juaquin Phoenix, and soon it will be announced that he's starring in a movie where he plays an adult who can't pass the first grade. Or is he really just this dumb?

Neil deGrasse Tyson's response:

He blew the opportunity to be in a bunch of Marvel movies so I would say he is dumb.

DunningKruger effect on steroids

the audiences he has had to spew this garbage to is the most depressing thing. Dude has had lectures at Ivy league schools and oxford/cambridge. The "pat on the head" approval he gets for this stuff is insane

Me in a job interview when I'm asked "So....tell me about yourself'

Math is math. That ain't math.

I honestly think he is just crazy...he claims he can remember being born...and even being in utero. LOL

AustinAg2K said:

---

He is amazed that the square root of 2 times 2 equals the square root of two cubed. That seems like basic math to me

---

Can you explain this to me? The square root of 4 is 2. The square root of 8 is like 2.8something. What am I missing?

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

He is amazed that the square root of 2 times 2 equals the square root of two cubed. That seems like basic math to me

---

Can you explain this to me? The square root of 4 is 2. The square root of 8 is like 2.8something. What am I missing?

---

Sorry, I should have put parenthesis in. The (sq rt of 2) cubed. Meaning sq rt 2 x sq rt 2 x sq rt 2. That is the same thing as saying ((sq rt 2) squared) x sq rt 2. (Sq rt 2) squared is in fact 2. So (sq rt 2) cubed = 2 x sq rt 2. Terrence goes on for 10 minutes taking about how this breaks math. He calls it a math loop. Don't ask me to explain his point more than that. I really can't.

Also, he talks a lot about how 1 x 1 = 2. He says because to multiply means to increase, therefore a number times one must be larger, or else your not multiplying. Something like that. Also, apparently he doesn't believe in 0. And he rewrote the periodic table because it's wrong. Elements are musical notes or something like that.

Like Terrence, I thought there was an "inconsistency" in the math in a lot of my ChemE classes too.

I just took my C and moved on though.

AustinAg2K said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

He is amazed that the square root of 2 times 2 equals the square root of two cubed. That seems like basic math to me

---

Can you explain this to me? The square root of 4 is 2. The square root of 8 is like 2.8something. What am I missing?

---

Sorry, I should have put parenthesis in. The (sq rt of 2) cubed. Meaning sq rt 2 x sq rt 2 x sq rt 2. That is the same thing as saying ((sq rt 2) squared) x sq rt 2. (Sq rt 2) squared is in fact 2. So (sq rt 2) cubed = 2 x sq rt 2. Terrence goes on for 10 minutes taking about how this breaks math. He calls it a math loop. Don't ask me to explain his point more than that. I really can't.

Also, he talks a lot about how 1 x 1 = 2. He says because to multiply means to increase, therefore a number times one must be larger, or else your not multiplying. Something like that. Also, apparently he doesn't believe in 0. And he rewrote the periodic table because it's wrong. Elements are musical notes or something like that.

---

He's not dumb… but he could be bat **** insane.

He is definitely mentally ill but no one close to him will confront him or they have but he is so far gone he won't accept help

(sqrt(2))^3 = 2 * sqrt(2)

Didn't even have to watch the video to conclude this is schizophrenic behavior.

He's insane.

This. He's clearly highly intelligent, but insane. Pretty scary for him and his loved ones, actually.

bam02 said:

---

This. He's clearly highly intelligent, but insane. Pretty scary for him and his loved ones, actually.

---

Disagree. I think he thinks he's highly intelligent, but I don't think he is at all. If he can't see why his 1 x 1 = 2 is very, very wrong, then he's not that smart.

Reminiscent of a Texags classic meme, Timecube. It's from 20 + years ago, but trust me it's a Texags classic.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160112000701/http://www.timecube.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube

BenTheGoodAg said:

---

https://i.imgur.com/MIUf7c8.gif

---

Well I won't argue with your point. I am no psychologist but I do think deep intelligence can be there along with deep psychosis that convinces itself that it is truly thinking on a different level. It's obviously illogical but I see intelligence in his ramblings. Our brain is a scary thing sometimes.

AustinAg2K said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

He is amazed that the square root of 2 times 2 equals the square root of two cubed. That seems like basic math to me

---

Can you explain this to me? The square root of 4 is 2. The square root of 8 is like 2.8something. What am I missing?

---

Sorry, I should have put parenthesis in. The (sq rt of 2) cubed. Meaning sq rt 2 x sq rt 2 x sq rt 2. That is the same thing as saying ((sq rt 2) squared) x sq rt 2. (Sq rt 2) squared is in fact 2. So (sq rt 2) cubed = 2 x sq rt 2. Terrence goes on for 10 minutes taking about how this breaks math. He calls it a math loop. Don't ask me to explain his point more than that. I really can't.

Also, he talks a lot about how 1 x 1 = 2. He says because to multiply means to increase, therefore a number times one must be larger, or else you're not multiplying. Something like that. Also, apparently he doesn't believe in 0. And he rewrote the periodic table because it's wrong. Elements are musical notes or something like that.

---

Multiply something by a number less than 1 and see what happens. He's just changing trying to change paradigms by exploiting translations of discrete math into qualitative language. It's delusional. But I'm sure he's just so good at speaking that it comes off as intelligent or even right.

New JRE is Terrence Howard debating Eric Weinstein, for anyone interested.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

New JRE is Terrence Howard debating Eric Weinstein, for anyone interested.

---

Makes me cringe just thinking about it.

I watched a little bit of it, and it wasn't too bad as it wasn't a debate, but just EW trying to help him out a little. Apparently Howard thanked Tyson for his critique (from the video above) and followed-up, but never heard back from Neil.

I watched a bunch of that one, too, and I can't decide if he's someone who read a couple of books and now thinks they're an expert or if he's a flat out con man. I don't think it's the second, because I can't see how he would be making money of these ideas, but I definitely don't think he's crazy.

One reason he could be a con man, though, is that he seemed to know his ideas break down. At multiple points in the new interview he says 1x1=2 is just a metaphor and he knows that if you have 1 thing 1 time then you have one. The math guy says when he says stuff like that, without telling people it's a metaphor, it turns people off and makes him look like an idiot... But then Howard seems to double down and explain why 1x1 does in fact equal 2. I can't tell what he really thinks.

At another point, he has some models (he has tons of models) and he is claiming they all fit together perfectly, and you can keep adding to it and you keep getting the same shape, like a fractal. When it's pointed out to him that his pieces don't connect together perfectly. He says something to the effect of, "Yeah, that's because it's expanding and the gap will grow." It seems to me that would break his model because it is not connecting perfectly (admittedly, I was out of my depth but the math guy was saying that makes his model wrong). It seemed like Howard already knew this and was either discounting it because he just didn't think it was important or if he was intentionally trying to hide something.

I do think this interview did a much better job of showing that he at least understands large parts of what he is doing, he just doesn't understand everything. When it was pointed out that he is using terms incorrectly, he seemed to accept that and agree that's a problem for him. However, when it was pointed out that his math was flat out wrong he would argue back and start throwing out big words. The math guy did seem to be genuinely trying to teach him, but Howard seemed to be refusing to listen to large parts. I do think now, if Howard could check his ego and accept some formal training, he might have some success in the field. I don't see him doing that, though.

Mr President Elect said:

---

I watched a little bit of it, and it wasn't too bad as it wasn't a debate, but just EW trying to help him out a little. Apparently Howard thanked Tyson for his critique (from the video above) and followed-up, but never heard back from Neil.

---

I like Neil Degrasse Tyson a lot, but I don't think I'd consider him an expert on anything other than media coverage. Neil is great at making science interesting, but I don't think he really knows as much as he tries to make people think he does. He's just a great entertainer.

AustinAg2K said:

---

bam02 said:

---

This. He's clearly highly intelligent, but insane. Pretty scary for him and his loved ones, actually.

---

Disagree. I think he thinks he's highly intelligent, but I don't think he is at all. If he can't see why his 1 x 1 = 2 is very, very wrong, then he's not that smart.

---

Has anyone simply asked if he has a learning disability where we see an "x" and he sees a "+"?

He's probably just saying 1+1=2 and is confused why everyone else is confused.

He's got us talking about him, I'd say he's brilliant

Clearly lib math. Further, he's a terrible "actor". Terrible.

wow Neil did a great job taking his actual assertions apart from a Peer Review

Terence Howard is just a weirdo.

Imagine if he starred in Oppenheimer with his "new" form of hydrogren, haha.

numbers. Who knew?