Defining Multiplication Because Terrence Howard Didn't

[@jpx1508]

NIce. Engaging formal demonstration of recognizing and establishing first principles - and of recognizing what is often inherently assumed.

[@peteowe]

I think I would go about proving 1 x 1 = 1 by proving that 1 / 1 = 1 and 2 / 1 = 2. (1 goes into 1, one time, and 1 goes into 2, two times) If these two equalities hold, 1 x 1 can only equal 1.

[@craftvscruft8060]

Yeah 1 x 1 is just having "one of one thing" which is not a hard concept to for us to think about and as an argument it's fine. But it relies on other concepts so if we wanted to press it you can always ask: What's 2? What does "going into" actually mean? It's an exercise in first principles. Providing a foundation as I'm doing in the vid is not even how a formal computerized proof would normally be written, your approach could work just fine because the foundation it needs is already in the library.