The true answer to 0/0

Lets follow some fallacious logic.

0 + 0 = 0  (Nothing add nothing is nothing)
0 - 0 = 0  (Nothing minus nothing is nothing)
0 * 0 = 0  (Nothing times nothing is nothing)
0 / 0 = 0  (Nothing goes into nothing no times)

Nothing goes into nothing, nothing times.
Same with any other number divided by 0.
4/0, nothing goes into 4 nothing times because theres nothing to go into 4.

That professor that said it equals some nullity number line is a bunch of shit. It doesn't apply to anything and this makes much more sense :P

Im glad I could solve this 1200 year old problem for douche bags. Theres no other real way around this... Unless you wanted to say the solution is 0, i :p

If everything multiplied by nothing is nothing why not have division the same way? Makes as much sense :p

Nothing goes into nothing as many times as you want. 0*84 = 0. 0*-2 = 0. 0*i = 0. Should this just be renamed the 'Divide by zero' board?

/sci is about n/0=∞, 0/0=0, .999=1, .444..5 numbers, and similar problems

How can something go into what does not exist? Nothing goes into nothing nothing times

>>5
Not familiar with addition and multiplication?

Re: 6

Nothing add nothing is nothing you baboon.
Same with multiplication.

>>7
So since nothing times anything is nothing, nothing divided by nothing is.. GASP! ANYTHING

Division doesnt mean the opposite of multiplication, it asks how many of this fits into that. Nothing fits into nothing not at all because theres nothing there.

okay I found a nice argumentation, which leads me to something, maybe...
"Suppose we have one apple to divide between 3 persons in a classroom. Each will have a third of an apple. Let one person leave the classrom. There will be two persons left to divide the apple between them, a half apple each. Let one more person leave the classroom. The remaining ONE person get the whole (=1) apple. Let the last person leave the classroom, there will be no persons left in the classroom to see the apple left there... *(deleted the rest because it said 1/0=0)*"

this looks like the last radioactive single atom in schrödinger's contraption, when nobody sees the apple how can somebody say it is there, maybe schrödinger's cat is dead, maybe not. if you say "but there IS an apple!" do you see it? no you think it is there. as long one person has a proof for the apple(seeing, touching, smelling it) it can always be divided by him, even if he claims not to be part of the experiment he influences it just by checking for the existence of that apple.
I have no solution for that.

>>10

lol DRUGS

>>9
Division is DEFINED as the inverse of multiplication, you inbred halfwit.

>>8
0/0=1

anything else divided by 0=infinity

nothing fits into nothing once.

it's a paradox, basically. if nothing can exist, it could not possibly be divided by itself. itself is nothing, therefore it would and could never happen. NOTHING is NOTHING which would make it intangible and unfathomable to begin with

fortunately, 0 is not "nothing", 0 is the middlepoint between positive and negative integers. infinitely numbers can get bigger or smaller from zero.

still, the fact remains, any number divided by itself is 1.

0/0 = 1 because it would go into itself once.

numbers may be meant to represent reality, but that doesn't mean that the rules and laws of numbers always have to apply to reality. in reality, unless you're counting, zero does not exist.

0 = imaginary = infinity

therefore

any number/0 = infinity 

any number/infinity = 0

the answer could logically and mathematically be anything.

but what happens in the case of any number/-infinity = -0?

p p p p paradox

>>12
Exactly. And because of that, since you can multiply by zero, you can divide by zero.

>>14
No. If multiplication by zero was injective then there would be division by zero.

What about 0/0?

Let's call the result of 0/0, z, if it made sense. z would have to satisfy z*0=0.

That's OK as far as it goes, any number z satisfies that equation. But it means that the result of 0/0 could be anything. We could argue that it's 1, or 2, and again we have a contradiction since 1 does not equal 2.

But perhaps there is a number z satisfying that's somehow special and we just have not identified it? So here is a slightly more subtle approach. Division is a continuous process. Suppose b and c are both non-zero. Then, in a sense that can be made precise. the ratios a/b and a/c will be close if b and c are close. A similar statement applies to the numerator of a ratio (except that it may be zero.)

So now assume that 0/0 has some meaningful numerical value (whatever it may be - we don't know yet), and consider a situation where both a and b in the ratio a/b become smaller and smaller. As they do the ratio should become closer and closer to the unknown value of 0/0.

There are many ways in which we can choose a and b and let them become smaller. For example, suppose that a=b throughout the process. For example, we might pick
a=b = 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, ....

Since

a=b,

for all choices of a we get the ratio 1 every time! This suggests that 0/0 should equal 1. But we could just as well pick
b = 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, ....

and let a be twice as large as b. Then the ratio is always 2! So 0/0 should equal 2. But we just said it should equal 1! In fact, by letting a be r times as large as b we could get any ratio r we please!

So again we run into contradictions, and therefore we are compelled to let 0/0 be undefined.