The point with division by zero is that division is the inverse of
multiplication, when you multiply something by zero you always get zero, and you
never get a number different from zero. Th function of multiplying by zero is
nor injective neither injective, so it cannot be inverted.
In other words if n*0 = 0, and you try to divide 0 by 0 you cannot say what what
was the value of n. Moreover, no number M different from zero can be the result
of an operation n*0=M thus, given M you can't find out what was n.
i can supply you with more math phenomena - like how the line y= (1/x) where
x exists from 1 to positive infinity and then this function is rotated about the
x-axis (makes a giant funnel shape lying on its sided). This shape has infinite
surface area, yet finite volume.
cesiuminjector said :
i can supply you with more math phenomena - like how the line y= (1/x) where x
exists from 1 to positive infinity and then this function is rotated about the
x-axis (makes a giant funnel shape lying on its sided). This shape has infinite
surface area, yet finite volume.
Groovy.Do it.DO IT!No, seriously I would like to see more.
i'm guessing it is estimating to =1 when you forced a conclusion out of it
it is safe assume
if x=0.9999...
then 10x-x=9
even though it would actually be 8.9999...
in layman the reason you cannot divide by zero: how many times can something go
into nothing
im sure this is a fallacy, but its not readily apparent to me why
in line 4, there is just the expanded a^2-b^2 which is equal to (a+b)(a-b), it
doesnt say a*b anywhere in line b. The next algebraic operation is to devide
(a-b) from both sides of the equation - which is perfectly legal
nevermind - im going to send this to one of the math proffesors at cal poly -
they will respond back with the right explanation
cockBeast:
cesiuminjector is right.If you had passed high school maths you'd understand
what he's talking about.Keywords here:"domain limitation".Notice how
the very top line doesn't say" -inf
Actually, it is wrong. Whoever drew up that example did not do it correctly
and made a goose of it.
a=b
a^2 = ab
a^2 + a^2 - 2ab = a^2 + ab - 2ab
2(a^2 - ab) = a^2 - ab
The fallacy is in the given, a=b. "a" does not equatl "b"
any more than circles are square. In an equation where you can just make things
up, anything is possible. Even 2=l
i understand what your getting at 27229, but what if "a" is a
function and "b" is the tangent line approximation of the function
"a". Given a domain of "b" where it closely approximates
"a", mathamaticians frequently (and must) substitute values of
"b". im sorry to inform you that "a" can equal "b"
beast - that aint no assumption - ive taken enough calc to show its true. Thats
actually pretty much the entire idea behind calculus. Using derivatives, tangent
lines, tangent planes, ect to determine values relating to a function. If you
limit the domain of a derivative, it will (for all practical purposes) be equal
the original function in that domain. you can substitute a for b because they
can be equal. Its no different than the sin of theta for small numbers is
approximately equal to the tan of theta for small numbers.
