>>65
Why stop there? What about 0*3i? or 0*i for that matter? Why not just all numbers?
>>62
Yes, you did assume that 0/0 = 1. That's what validates multiplying both sides by any other denominator. If 3/4 = x, then multiplying both sides by 4 yields 4*3/4 = 4*x. The fours on the left side CANCEL OUT BECAUSE 4/4 = 1. But the same does not apply to doing this with zero, since 0/0 does not, by convention, equal 1.
>>64
Yeah, probably.