OH SHIT, someone actually divided by zero.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/berkshire/content/articles/2006/12/06/divide_zero_feature.shtml

Apparently, 0/0 == nullity.

I am stunned :O

Well if your just going to make shit up then sure it works. Like imaginary numbers <--- made up.

Not a number is nooooot a number!

Yeah sure, you can just make up axioms when you feel like it. Problem is, they tend to destroy the usefulness of your system.

>>3
They are made up, as all the numbers are, but they're usefull too.
From wikipedia: Imaginary numbers have essential concrete applications in a variety of sciences and related areas such as signal processing, control theory, electromagnetism, quantum mechanics, and cartography.

Was a joke... but nullity has no real usefullness :p

Imaginary numbers are math wankery

Imaginary numbers are over nine thousand.

nullity is a joke. Its the same as saying i dont know what the answer is to 5*5 so i will just make a new number funnity. so now 5*5 is funnity. And nullity is the same as the computers NaN (Not a Number). if i did 0/0 on a computer it will come back with NaN.

They should just make it equal to zero seeing as it has no real world application anyways.

>>11
it does. LOL CALCULUS

What is unforgivable about that guy is that he's teaching his nonsense to schoolkids as if it were some amazing new discovery. And reading the comments to that story is quite depressing. So many stupid people....

"UPDATED: 11:50 GMT, 8 December 2006
Given the, er, light-hearted mathematical debate Dr Anderson's theory has generated, we're delighted to announce he will join us on Tuesday 12 December to answer questions and discuss some of the criticisms levelled against his theory of 'nullity'.
You will be able to hear in more detail from Dr Anderson on this page later on Tuesday.
Many thanks for your comments."
OH JESUS CHRIST

I don't get why you can't divide by zero. Five puppies divided into zero groups leaves zero puppies. If you have zero groups of anything than you have zero.

>>15
Five puppies divided into zero groups leaves your five puppies for yourself

I already had a term for 0/0: "wild card", same as x/0 and -x/0.

>>15

Also consider that Five puppies divided into groups of 0 (functions the exact same way) gives you infinity groups. As a matter of fact, don't even ask what order of infinity that is.

Think of it this way.. 15 divided into groups of 5 gives you 3 groups. 15 divided into 5 groups gives you 3 puppies per group.

Frankly, this guy needs to learn what an "operation" is. He should probably check out an abstract algebra textbook, I'd be glad to donate mine with the appropriate definitions underlined.

1. Apply operator
2. Receev infinite

>>17
ITT we make up names for 0/0
Mine is "transnumerical unity"

"percent"

>>21 teh winner

>>21
woah, i'm freaking out from this revelation, its like you discovered god or something

>>21
Maybe you too can be on the BBC

The thing that pisses me off the most about this is that he didn't even try to prove the consistency of his number system, let alone get it published in a reputable math journal. He just contacted the press to get his 15 minutes of fame. Now mathematicians laugh at him (and rightfully so), which just reinforces the layman viewpoint that science is a big conspiracy that rejects criticism and alternative theories.

As far as the usefulness of his number system goes, planes are not dropping out of the sky because of divide by zero errors. If you replace NaN by nullity, they still have to know how to handle nullity. What's 5+nullity? What's 3/nullity? He's accomplished nothing.

Anyways, >>21, please listen to me. That it's really related to this thread.
I went to Yoshinoya a while ago; you know, Yoshinoya?
Well anyways there was an insane number of people there, and I couldn't get in.
Then, I looked at the banner hanging from the ceiling, and it had "150 yen off" written on it.
Oh, the stupidity. Those idiots.
You, don't come to Yoshinoya just because it's 150 yen off, fool.
It's only 150 yen, 1-5-0 YEN for crying out loud.
There're even entire families here. Family of 4, all out for some Yoshinoya, huh? How fucking nice.
"Alright, daddy's gonna order the extra-large." God I can't bear to watch.
You people, I'll give you 150 yen if you get out of those seats.
Yosinoya should be a bloody place.
That tense atmosphere, where two guys on opposite sides of the U-shaped table can start a fight at any time,
the stab-or-be-stabbed mentality, that's what's great about this place.
Women and children should screw off and stay home.
Anyways, I was about to start eating, and then the bastard beside me goes "extra-large, with extra sauce."
Who in the world orders extra sauce nowadays, you moron?
I want to ask him, "do you REALLY want to eat it with extra sauce?"
I want to interrogate him. I want to interrogate him for roughly an hour.
Are you sure you don't just want to try saying "extra sauce"?
Coming from a Yoshinoya veteran such as myself, the latest trend among us vets is this, extra green onion.
That's right, extra green onion. This is the vet's way of eating.
Extra green onion means more green onion than sauce. But on the other hand the price is a tad higher. This is the key.
And then, it's delicious. This is unbeatable.
However, if you order this then there is danger that you'll be marked by the employees from next time on; it's a double-edged sword.
I can't recommend it to amateurs.
What this all really means, though, is that you, >>21, should just stick with today's special.

>>25
Prelude> 0/0
NaN
Prelude> -0/0
NaN
Prelude> 1/0
Infinity
Prelude> -1/0
-Infinity

If you put 0^0 in the calculator into the windows calculator you get "1".  What does microsoft know that they don't want to tell us?

>>28
Lies. Funny thing is, Windows CALC.EXE actually gives the right answers:

1/0: You cannot divide by zero
0/0: The result of the function is undefined

(Your translation may vary)

Dividing by zero is a completely invalid concept.  Especially the term "nullity".  The answer to a mathematical equation containing numerical digits can simply not be a term that does not lie on the number line. 

>>30
That does actually make sense.  I never thought about it that way...

>>30
That's why dividing naturals always gives you naturals

>>32
explain?

>>30 claimed that a mathematical equation containing numerical digits should be solved with something that lies in the number line. By "number" I suppose he means the reals.

Then you have the line of integer numbers. There are many integer equations and functions which do not return an integer, but something outside the line of integers. For example, x = 1 / 2. 1 and 2 are from the integers line, x is not.

So if it happens with integer operations which return reals, why can't we have a line of reals for which some operations return strings such as "nullity", or hyperreals?

>>34
Assuming you read the article that this thread is based on, nullity does not lie on the number line...

So I guess that settles it... you CAN'T divide by 0.