Anyone who tries it will release about 3×1018 joules of energy from the zero-point source of spacetime. That's about as much energy that was released in the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake.
Don't be fuckin' crazy and think that you'll just divide by zero and survive such an energy release.
>>1
1. Take any number (for example, 1)
2. Follow it by a fraction bar or division symbol (1/)
3. Put a zero on the other side (1/0)
4. O SHI-
5. ??????
6. PROFIT!!!
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-30 17:00
eBaum is a thief.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-30 18:14
Lets look at what happens when you divide a number by numbers close to zero:
1/.00001 = 100,000
1/.00000000000001 = 100,000,000,000,000
It would appear that the closer to dividing by zero you get, the closer your answer gets to infinity, as opposed to something interesting.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-30 20:37
1/0 = Infinity.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-30 21:17
dude ur so fucking stupid. It's so easy to divide by zero. Just Get a number and divide zero times. Don't expect an answer though cuz there is no answer. It's undefined. So if u get a question like that on a test, just write, undefined and it should be right.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 0:30
can't divide directly by zero
it's not infinity
lim x->0 1/x -> infinity but directly dividing a constant by 0 doesn't get you anything
If you approach from the negative side, you just get more and more negative approaching negative infinity as you approach 0.
So, at x=o you have where the approach of negative infinity and positive infinity meet, and it is undefined.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 2:04
>>8
of course undefined is what one would write on a test, but when you say "Just get a number and divide zero times" that sounds like "get a number and don't divide it" which implys you would be left your number as if you divided by one.
Meanwhile I'm wondering what takes place when you make the jump from x = .oooooooooooooo1 to x = 0.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 2:07
>>11
so 1/0 = negative infitiy and positive infinity?
either way it looks like the absolute value of infinity
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 3:54
infinity's magnitude is infinite. It has no absolute value.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 5:33
>>8 >>12
but you don't say "Just get a number and divide zero times", you say "Just get a number and divide it ONE time, by the number zero"
heh
lim(x->a) f rougly translated means the value that is approached by 'f' as 'x' approaches 'a'.
Lim IS absolute value! It is wrong to say (or write) that Lim itself approaches some value. Lim IS that value.
Wrong:
lim x->0 1/x -> infinity
Right:
lim x->0 1/x = infinity
Name:
Krieger2007-10-31 13:46
To understand dividing by zero, you need to understand math. It is not an absolute answer to everything, it's simply our best attempt at trying to simplify the universe and its problems. Assuming this, math is only what you make of it. So to divide by zero, you need to define divide. Is is how many times the denominator will go into the numerator? Is it what you get when you separate the numerator into denominator pieces? It can have many answers, but seeing as there is no point in deciding which one of these is correct, it has been decided that none are, and as such is undefined. So just don't divide by zero.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 16:11
>>18
i dunno how to add superscript to this forum, but just pretend + is in superscript.
C/0+ = infinity
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 16:14
>>16
Being proud of not knowing shit got old in middle school. Underage b&.
The easiest way to understand division by 0 is by just plotting out f(x) = 1/x and seeing what happens near the Y axis.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 17:49
>>21
pretty sure that just proves a limit exists bubs
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 18:41
Okay, so if I have four cookies, and two small children to equally distribute them to, they each get two. That's four divided by two (4/2), which is two (2).
Distributing ten cookies to three kids is three cookies to a kid, with one left over. 10/3 = 3 with Remainder 1.
Anyone who can tell me how many cookies I give to a kid if I have some cookies and no kids wins teh Internets and has successfully divided by zero.
Anyone who tells me how many cookies I give to zero kids when I have zero cookies needs to show their work to the world, as this would successfully solve 0/0 and, by extension, 0^0 (zero to the zero power.
I'm an azn, I know math. So, look:
- operation x/0 is not defined (when x not 0)
- operation 0/0 is indeterminate
What does it mean "not defined"? In simple words: you can drive your car but you can not fly with it. Operation "flying" is not defined for your car. It is the same as with division. Not defined. You can not even try it.
What does it mean "indeterminate"? tl;dr Look up on wikipedia (Indeterminate form).
Name:
Finch2007-10-31 19:02
"Not defined. You can not even try it."
I just brought up a virtual calculator. Divided by 1 by 0. So yes i can try it. I just won't get a definitive answer.
Sorry if I'm not a 'azn' and all but i can actually make sense.
What is 8 divided by apple? It makes no sense, because division by fruit is not defined. Neither is division by zero.
Now, you could make a new division operator and define it for zero, but you'll find that what you get is either boring or contradicts other parts of arithmatic.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:15
>>25
So you're not even willing to consider the concept in a way other than you already view it?
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:17
0/0 = 1
it's true... most calculators won't agree with this, because they use logarithms when making divisions.
exactly! it is not defined because it cannot be defined and still be practical.
eg. we can say x/0 => 5. now what? what does it tell us?
nothing.
>>26
no, really, you can not even try it. because it is not defined, it is not there, it is not concievable!
yes, you can write it down, but this writing is nonsense.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:19
>>29
That's not true, and it's not even defined by convention. Express opinion as opinion and fact as fact, please.
it is not a matter of view. it is a matter of definition.
27/3 = 9 and only 9. not a matter of view either.
before debating investigate the subject, plox
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:33
>>32
And, despite the message in >>23, you can't try to view things differently? That's like refusing to work with other number bases.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:46
If one divides an object buy .5, one will now have 2 objects.
If one divides an object by one millionth, one will have a million peices.
If one divided something by an even smaller amount, one would have even more objects.
But when you divide something by the smallest increment zero, wouldn't you be able to get infinity parts of the object?
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:50
>>34
If one divides an object by -.5, one will now have -2 objects.
If one divides an object by negative one millionth, one will have negative a million pieces.
So if you divide something by zero, wouldn't you be able to get negative infinity parts of the object?
Short answer: read the fucking thread.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 19:51
>>34
Theoratically, yes. But again, you're working with the concept of limits, and not the division itself. Keep trying.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 20:40
Okay, let's do a problem then sir.
Now, you see that fraction down there?
3/0 = ?
You can rewrite it as a mutiplication problem to find what 3/0 is okay?
0x = 3
Newfag will say its 3 but, problem is
3 times 0 = 0
And simple multiplication rule states:
0 times (x) = 0 [x means any number]
Because of that, there is no way you can get a number besides zero, therefore, the function "Does Not Exist" or, "Undefined".
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 20:46
>>37
Your proof has a major flaw. You are treating 0/0 as equal to 1, which would validate multiplying both sides by zero and not messing anything up. but this is not the case. 3/0 = x is very, very hard to deal with, though it's the point of this thread. Sorry to shoot you down like this, but you really need to scrutinize your proofs better to make sure that they're airtight.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 20:49
Bawww :< A for effort though 38.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-31 20:54
Does that mean that I win or that you don't buy it?