/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13750212

8KiB, 342x386, 598.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 11:31:33 2021 No.13750212 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13750273 >>13750284 >>13750353 >>13750427 >>13751500 >>13751872 >>13752138 >>13752162 >>13752481 >>13752484 >>13752491 >>13752900

>You can't divide by zero because... Well you just can't, okay?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 11:59:39 No.13750266 Report

Quoted By:

Okay

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:02:00 No.13750273 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
Trust the experts, chud.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:07:59 No.13750283 Report

Quoted By: >>13751820

The inventor of the number zero did divide by zero. Europeans didn't adopt that because Christianity

N/0 = 0

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO cvbbmwwe4rzz.png, 53KiB, 403x448

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:08:10 No.13750284 Report

Quoted By: >>13750314

>>13750212
Division of x by y produces the number that when multiplied by y gives x. But multiplication by 0 only gives 0.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:23:51 No.13750314 Report

Quoted By: >>13750328 >>13750340 >>13750407 >>13752138 >>13756868

>>13750284
Then the answer is obviously 0... Why do you need to FORBID the operation?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:32:21 No.13750328 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750314

because in practical uses dividing by 0 like you are trying to will give useless results. just take the blackpill and accept that we cant divide by 0

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:35:04 No.13750334 Report

Quoted By: >>13752770

I think they're hiding something for sure. The reason why we're not allowed to divide by 0 is that this division is reserved to rich people at the top of the pyramid. It's the secret to their wealth and they obviously don't want to share.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:37:38 No.13750340 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750314
>Then the answer is obviously 0
Why? 0*0 = 0, not x

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 12:44:51 No.13750353 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
You can't divide by 0 because there's no consistent way to define what it means.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 13:06:55 No.13750404 Report

Quoted By: >>13752775

You can it just leads to infinity. Think of it graphically and it makes sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 13:07:38 No.13750407 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750314
But logically speaking, when we divide x/y and y gets closer and closer to 0 the answer starts to tend to infinity.
> 1/0.1 = 10
> 1/0.001 = 100
> 1/0.0001 = 1000
So on...
So the answer can be infinity too. Hence, there's not a specific answer that's agreed upon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 13:19:44 No.13750427 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
you can't divide by zero because division only works in skew fields, which have no zero divisors because every other element is a unit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 18:40:50 No.13751500 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
You actually can, look up the Extended Reals

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 242382238_1061432197937697_41548 (...).jpg, 37KiB, 577x596

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 20:16:52 No.13751820 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750283
No, because N/0 = 0 implies 0*0 = N

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 20:28:08 No.13751851 Report

Quoted By:

Divide through zero?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 480px-Babylonian_digit_0.svg.png, 4KiB, 380x380

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 20:35:45 No.13751872 Report

Quoted By: >>13752875

>>13750212
Zero is not a number,
would you try to divide a number by "afljadsfk" ?? No, its not a numeric expression.

For thousands of years mathematicians understood this, which is why zero was expressed as a blank at best, or a place holder at worst. To express nothingness as somethingness... How many thousands of hours have been lost by students attempting to do such a thing- divide by zero.

RETVRN TO TRADITION

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 21:42:54 No.13752138 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750314
>>13750212
If $n|d$ then there exists $a$ such that $a * d = n$ . If $d = 0$ then we can see that no $a$ satisfies the equation $a * 0 = n$ for non-zero $n$ .
If $n = 0$ , then all $a$ satisfy the equation ( $a$ is undefined).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 21:48:18 No.13752162 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
How many times can nothing go into something?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 21:50:52 No.13752174 Report

Quoted By: >>13752463 >>13752773

Wouldn't the answer just be infinity?
Why not just say X/0 = infinity instead of just outright banning the notion that something can be divided by 0

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 22:54:13 No.13752455 Report

Quoted By: >>13752463 >>13752773

It's not infinity, the answer is undefined. You can't just make the assumption that something is infinity if the limit approaches infinity. If you could prove $\frac{x}{0}$ is infinity for all $x$ you'd probably get a fields medal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 22:55:14 No.13752463 Report

Quoted By: >>13752512

>>13752174
>>13752455
Meant to reply

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 22:56:55 No.13752473 Report

Quoted By:

i think computer people mental gymnast their way around this by saying the "0" is different when its just "0", and when its "0" to divide by
but for me, its 0. but also a placeholder! but nevermind...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:01:15 No.13752481 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
>you cant divide by zero because... well, because then how many would you have? what are you dividing by?
>but numbers are totally real bro you just have to trust me, okay?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:02:05 No.13752484 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750212
If you believe that you can divide by zero, why don't
you show us how you work it out, by posting a vid?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:05:38 No.13752491 Report

Quoted By: >>13752493

>>13750212
Something/0=?
Is the same as 0*?=Something

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:07:20 No.13752493 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752491
I don't think that is what the crackpots mean. They generally refuse to give definitions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:14:26 No.13752512 Report

Quoted By: >>13752520 >>13752740 >>13752773

>>13752463
Layman brainlet here. Sorry I'm advance.
When number systems are expanded, we gain new insights into nature.
Naturals, integers, reals, imaginary/complex.
Since there is no number that squares to -1 ...
Yet, "i" and complex numbers have deep relevance in nature, is it possible to expand the number system to include x/0 in a similar way and discover a new mathematical paradigm?
Go easy on me. Just spitballing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:16:07 No.13752520 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752512
Sorry "in" advance... Damn tablet

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Oct 2021 23:33:26 No.13752573 Report

Quoted By: >>13752764

1+1=2 because... Well it just is, ok?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 00:48:08 No.13752740 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752512
I think you're right, and I believe there has already been an abundance of work investigating that topic. It's not really something I've studied closely but in the field of abstract algebra there are ways to construct number systems where division by 0 is possible and can yield interesting conclusions.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Principia_Mathematica_54-43.png, 43KiB, 800x333

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:01:39 No.13752764 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752573

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:04:21 No.13752768 Report

Quoted By:

You can, in the extended real numbers. But it won't be a field or even ring anymore. In most cases you lose more than you gain. There are times in topology, complex analysis, and measure theory where this is useful.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO div-by-zero.png, 111KiB, 306x333

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:07:12 No.13752770 Report

Quoted By:

>>13750334
The USS Yorktown divided by zero once and was dead in the water for like 2 hours and 45 minutes.
Just don't do it man, it's dangerous

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:09:29 No.13752773 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752174
>>13752455
>>13752512
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_real_number_line
What you guys are talking about are the extended reals, which have been studied extensively. I believe somebody proved it's consistent iff the usual real arithmetic is consistent, so it's an equally valid way of thinking, and it has some uses, such as in calculus.

The problem is that layman retards don't understand that the infinite "numbers" in this system aren't the same as the infinite cardinalities, nor the infinite ordinals, since it's more like an infinite "limit". Pedagogically, this just muddles the various kinds of infinity, when most people don't even understand how to factor polynomials. Not to mention, it also fucks up a lot of calculations if you use it wrong, and this is what most people use math for anyway.

For these, and other, reasons, they don't teach this in school.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:09:35 No.13752775 Report

Quoted By: >>13752929

>>13750404
1/0 = inf Take reciprocals of both sides.
0 = 1/inf Multiply both sides by 2
2*0 = 0 = 2/inf
so
1/inf = 2/inf mutliply both sides by inf
1 = 2
Way to go, genius.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:31:56 No.13752824 Report

Quoted By:

you know the number 0 isnt real when people argue about "how the computer reacts to dividing by zero" instead of doing it on the computer and seeing what happens
>but different architectures!
yeah but wed just do it on all the different computers... if it were real at all. but its not.

if the argument for something is someones opinion then that thing is made up

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 01:56:09 No.13752875 Report

Quoted By: >>13752969

>>13751872
your iq is zero

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:11:02 No.13752900 Report

Quoted By: >>13752904

>>13750212
0 / 0 = 0
0 * 0 = 0

works for me

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:13:51 No.13752904 Report

Quoted By: >>13752910

>>13752900
for divide i get "ERR"
or sometimes 1

what now?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 616KiB, 640x637

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:15:56 No.13752910 Report

Quoted By: >>13752915

>>13752904
lol do you believe calculators

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:17:08 No.13752915 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752910
i dont even believe numbers
what are you using to 0/0 ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:22:20 No.13752929 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752775
>1/0 = inf Take reciprocals of both sides.
>0 = 1/inf Multiply both sides by 2
>2*0 = 0 = 2/inf
And that's fine. You take a line with length of two, and divide it infinitely many times. How long is each piece? Zero.

You're having to go back to
>0 = 1/inf
to get to
>1/inf = 2/inf
But all of that is unnecessary because lines of length one and two, when divided infinitely many times, yield pieces the length of zero.

Why? Because there is no such thing as an infinite series, or infinity, at all. There isn't even zero, as a quantity. Zero is just a placeholder for no quantity. Negative numbers and imaginary numbers are pure fiction.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 02:35:31 No.13752969 Report

Quoted By:

>>13752875
your iq is divided by zero, which equal "mcvbskdjfaggootcvbn"

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 03:57:50 No.13753160 Report

Quoted By:

it can't even be defined in the extended reals lol
$1=0\cdot 0^{-1}=\lim_{x\rightarrow 0^+}0\cdot\frac{1}{x}=0\neq 1$

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Oct 2021 16:30:45 No.13754577 Report

Quoted By: >>13756915

that's literally the most apt description. the way real numbers are defined is that division by zero simply just isn't allowed. feel free to come up with your system

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO his.jpg, 10KiB, 291x291

Anonymous Sat 16 Oct 2021 07:26:26 No.13756868 Report

Quoted By: >>13756906

>>13750314
If 2÷0=0 and 11÷0=0 it would follow that 2=11.

We know that 2=/=11 therefore x÷0=/=0.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Oct 2021 07:44:34 No.13756906 Report

Quoted By:

>>13756868
>mathematics

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Oct 2021 07:49:41 No.13756915 Report

Quoted By:

>>13754577
>the way real numbers are defined is that division by zero simply just isn't allowed

The set of real numbers is defined regardless, the operation "forbidding" zero is merely an arbitrary, though extremely useful, operation defined over the set.

If one was particularly motivated, they could define another operation similar to division that allowed a denominator of zero, but it would be drastically less useful in general.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches