Division by zero is possible

in the zero ring lol ZOMG!!

>>80
An operating system's kernel processor privileges

>>78

Strictly speaking, x/0 != inf.

lim(x/a,a,0) = inf, though, where that means the limit as a goes to zero.

>>82
inf. * 0 = 0, if you have 0 infinities then you have 0

infinite 0s makes 0

x must be 0

>>82
a/x as x->0 does not have a limit
>>83
infinity isn't a real number and as such those algebraic expressions are meaningless

Does anyone notice that three people seem to have been repeating the same fucking point over and over and over and over again while proving only that they are fuckwits, talking about a subject no one cares about, and that has (ironically) ZERO utility?

Fucking retards.

>>85 Well maths is pretty boring. Pointing out little flaws in people's mathematical naivete is pretty much the highlight of my day.

>>86
you need to find yourself a girlfriend

>>87 wouldn't know where to begin.

>>88
Well here's a subtle hint. If you see a girl (they're the things with breasts and nice asses), never EVER talk about ANYTHING related to the zero ring.

I'm not the Zero Ring Guy. And I might as well talk about the zero ring since there are plenty of attractive females maths students. around here.

>>90
Lies! They're men so desperate to get laid SOME way that they dress up as women.

DON'T BE FOOLED!

>>85
Does Zero utility belong to ring zero?

hey guys

0/0= OH SHI-

0/0 = 0

no wate, 0/0 = 1

0 ÷ 0 = ∞

>>94
Correct.
>>95
Correct.
>>96
Correct.

>>97
Correct.

1*0=0
0*0=0
∞*0=0

It all makes sense now!

>>98
So... 0 = 1 = ∞?

>>99
MORE LYK 'THEIR IS NO SPOON' LOL AMIRITE??

Which infinity are we talking about? You know there are an infinite number of infinities right?

there are a countably infinite uncountable infinities

There is only 1 infinity and it is not a number, like 0.

>>103
there are a countably infinite uncountable infinities

>>103
WTF 0 is a number, 1-1=0, and you can type it with the keyboard

>>103
Which infinity would that be then? Aleph_0? Aleph_1? Aleph_googolplex?

Zionists! Use \omega for infinities! Free Palestine!

You can only divide by zero if you remember to wear your goggles.

They don't actually do anything, but it's a small comfort for when the very essence of a local universe comes collapsing down around you.

inifinity^infinity is the BIGGEST INFINITY EVAR.

>>109
No, that just gives you the next in the Aleph series.

I'm sick and tired of people having sex with children and only going to jail for 2 years.
           -Shaq

WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU ANONYMOUS ALL OF YOU FAIL INFINITE IS A - AND WILL ALWAYS BE A -

>>2


Defined as "Undefined"?

TIME PARADOX!

>>113
Yes, it is in fact Defined as all things that are Undefined, this means it is beyond our comprehension at this point.
>>111
I have to agree with good old Shaquille here.
>>107
\Omega,
\O,
/0,
Hmm, you say they use (divide by/over) Zero(or the term Omega which I believe is "The End"?) to define INFINITY?
Well, I guess you could say that is what infinity IS. So it would only make sense.
>>102
None of them are counted, but the Real number stands as the index when you /0, so as while underneath those infinites are an infinite amount of zeros, it is a straight line of them down that follows on the number path or ring or whatever MAKING it a field, though a completely one dimensional field(infinity rests behind them remember, each number in the count,there is no infinity real so there cannot be an array containing infinity with the index size of infinity) meaning that you now have two types of numbers. Those that are just numbers and those that have an array (or a ray of infinite zeroes under each number) of infinity, a term that could be considered xi, but i is already used for imaginaries, these are not imaginary, those zeroes are there, they're just zeroes, because they are undefined.
Hmm, undefined wait isn't that what they were already defined as, time paradox or what not? Not so, you just use what zionist used or use xu instead, to stand for infinite undefined zeroes.
So, 3/0=3u, maybe this is what the R is these people are talking about, but I have no idea what it really is so I won't comment  
>>99
The problem is showing that the number is plain or contains infinity, while you're busy in rings and fields and various other dimensions that do not include the dimension infinity rests in and I guess that it should be stated that infinity exists in the 4th dimension, time, as it IS time in a literal sense, unless of course you're DIO and have been around long enough (and gained the help of KAAZ) to figure out how to use /0 or Xu to defined the undefined values, or maybe empower all the forms of math to include infinity aka time on the numbers, to have true control over them and be able to stop them.
The name of the function? Why the name KAAZ took when he granted his spirit as a stand to dio, in a vain hope to get revenge on Joseph for sending him into space where he could not use his physical body.

za warudo.

>>114
no, cantor proved that there is no cardinal number (aka "the infinities") between |X| and |P(X)|. |N| is the smallest infinity (each subset of N with an upper bound is finite), hence...

there is a natural bijection between the cardinal numbers and the natural numbers (f(1)=|N|, f(n)=|P(f(n-1))|), therefore that they are countable. QED.

don't they teach you this shit as an introduction to topology?

oh wait, you're 14 right?

sigh

Include the first dimension in your numbers to include the fourth?
Or don't it's fine by me.

>>9
Yes it is. gb2/JHS

>>24
The real numbers are defined as the set of limits of all converging infinite sequences of rational numbers, which are in turn defined as the ratio of two integers m and n, where n is nonzero (ie m/n). Thus, let
a_n = m/n, where m=0, n=1. 0,1 are in the integer set.
Then the limit of a_n as n->infinity = 0. Thus 0 is in the real numbers by definition because it has just been demonstrated that it is the limit of an infinite sequence of rational numbers.

QEDw4ch?

no, the real numbers are defined as the set of _equivalence classes_ of cauchy sequences where a_n = b_n if lim a_n = lim b_n as n -> inf

if you're going to be a smartass then at least get that right

>>119
LOLI HAET PARADOXU