>>14
"Nullity" didn't do anything that hasn't been done for a long time already. He gave "undefined" a new name and a symbol. The properties are all exactly the same, and it clarifies nothing in mathematics or in his own field. The resulting set (R union {nullity}) is not a field, much like in every other similar theory. Until he actually provides some example of when this notation is useful (the examples given in his own field, Computer Science, have all been adequately and simply handled with exceptions for years), it's no different than me saying "let's call 1/0 'fuckyeah', then you can divide by 0! (in R union {fuckyeah})."
I don't know if this guy is a crank who somehow obtained a doctorate (it does happen - there was an asian "mathematician" who had a phd from a decent american university that claimed to have a counterexample to Fermat's Last Theorem after Wiles proved it, using some non-standard model of the natural numbers that no one else in the world uses), or if he gave a realistic explanation and the BBC took it radically out of context to make a more interesting article. In either case it is not a "discovery" as the article claims - the only original part of his work is the name and symbol.