Let me start off by saying I swear I'm not trolling. I just had a thought:
Okay, so we all know that when you divide by zero it is impossible. Why? Because any number multiplied by zero yields zero; therefore, it is impossible to discern what (this is concerning 0/0 only, by the way) was originally multiplied by zero. But concerning the fraction 0/0, couldn't there be an answer to that? And wouldn't that answer be a set of ALL numbers (any type: real, complex, etc...in a way it would be the largest infinity)? Am I buttfuck retarded? Is this all an indeterminate form is?
just divide by 1 instead, and pretend it never happened.
>>7942918
0/0 is 0
mindfuck: numbers are not even real, you have to think of it as numerators and denominators
>>7942923
>0/0 is 0
It isn't, you have to take limits. 0/0 can be anything.
>>7942900
you can allow your equal sign to relate an expression to a set of numbers. I mean that's what congruence does in Z/pZ for example.
3+1 = 0 mod(2).
But you can't force other people to use it. And in particular, if the equal sign denotes the equality between two numbers, then the set of all numbers is not a number per se. So it doesn't "fit". Feel free to use it on your own work, but don't use it with other people.
Just like your cock.
>>7942923
there you go
n/0 ; catch-exception: n / (0/0) = n / ( 1 ), return argument for catch-exception-procedure
>>7942900
>birdposting
>>7942900
OK let's clear up some misconceptions. Math is basically a bunch rules (definitions and axioms) that useful only if it yields results (through theorems). You can invent any weird math system you want but if it is not useful to anyone or yields inconsistent result you may as well scrap it.
0/0 is an example in real numbers and algebra that is an inconsistent result. Examples:
Y = x/2x; at x= 0 I get 0/0 at x=0. However I can simplify this to 1/2 by canceling the x’s.
Y = x/4x; at x= 0 I get 0/0 at x=0. However I can simplify this to 1/4 by canceling the x’s
So in this case I started with two functions that were 0/0 but the results are not the same after a simple manipulation. Many functions that are initially 0/0 can be manipulated to yield a meaningful result through algebra and taking limits, etc. But because of its inconsistency problems, 0/0 is defined to be indeterminate.
Final note, just because of a small problem with 0/0 is not reason enough to scrap all of numbers and algebra.
>>7942928
no you idiot, zero is zero, as in less than one, what the fuck are you people even talking about? its like a thread full of retards in here!
>>7942939
zero is infinity? you what m8?
your all really dumb, i mean really really stupid
>>7942928
>you have to take limits
no you don't. 0/0 is not defined. the fact that the limits x/y as they tend to 0 can be anything is a hint of why a definition doesn't make much sense, but nothing else.
>>7944071
>zero is infinity?
In projective geometry you can identify them.
>>7943258
when dividing by x you have to specify that x is not equal to 0, x/4x is 1/4 everywhere except for x=0, if you take limits it's another story though
