I know I've said this before but I think I might of thought of some proof that can end all of this division by zero shit forever. For those who don’t know what logarithms are, is the same as saying "With , what does have to be to get ?". Lets look at as an example, with , what does have to be to get ? The answer is , because . Now lets look at , with , what does have to be to get ? can of course be any number, so I will just keep the answer as . Because (with being , it still works the same with any other positive logarithm) we get
We can use a similar method to prove that doesn't have an answer, with , what does have to be to get ?
If you don’t understand the above proof you can get the same answers by asking "If you are travailing at mph, how long does it take you to travel meters?" or simply "How many 's go into ?" for and "If you are travailing at mph , how long does it take you to travel meter?" or "How many 's go into ?" for . Well okay maybe '' isn't a suitable answer for the first one, but you have to at least accept that the answer can be any number, and that it deserves at least a small mention in this article.
We can use a similar method to prove that doesn't have an answer, with , what does have to be to get ?
If you don’t understand the above proof you can get the same answers by asking "If you are travailing at mph, how long does it take you to travel meters?" or simply "How many 's go into ?" for and "If you are travailing at mph , how long does it take you to travel meter?" or "How many 's go into ?" for . Well okay maybe '' isn't a suitable answer for the first one, but you have to at least accept that the answer can be any number, and that it deserves at least a small mention in this article.
