Jump to content

Zero to the Zero


jordan

Recommended Posts

0/0=R and all imaginary numbers.
False. It is undefined. Of course, you are free to devise your own number system in which this statement is true, however, you must re-derive any other mathematical results that you wish to use. You can't change a definition, and apply other results in Mathematics, as if nothing else had changed.
if a/b=c, and a is 0, then c is 0 and can't be any other number but 0.
Yes, for any given [math]b \ne 0[/math], the above statement is true, which proves that [math]0/x = 0[/math], for non-zero real [math]x[/math].
+or-, thanks for the reminder. For the sake of logical thought and processing, since there can be two values for a quadratic equation, and 3 for a cubic, and so on, for x/0, or rather 0/0 there are in infinite number of solutions.
Nope. Division of two real numbers is a single-valued operation, as I mentioned in my earlier post.
0/0=? 1

0/0=1/1*0/0

0/0=0/0 correct

Nope. Again' date=' division by [math']0[/math] is undefined so one cannot use algebraic operations on any equation that has such a term in it.
All real numbers and imaginary numbers follow the same pattern if 1 is replaced by x or any variable that you choose.
Nope. Your argument isn't even true for real numbers, thus one cannot extend a fallacious argument to the complex domain.
It's not only undefined, it's infinity.
You're kidding, right? Do you realize that, in only 6 words, you've managed to contradict yourself?

 

If something is undefined then it cannot be [math]\infty[/math] because it is undefined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I said square root, as in square root of 49 is + or - 7, since both can be solutions.

This comes down to my disagreement with the square root of an integer bein only the positive root, and the only way the negative one is a solution is if the original equation was x^2=49, which is utter stupidity.

And no, I do not make my own rules, as 0/0 has any solution, since by the definitions themselves x/y means how many times y can be contained in x, and 0 can be contained in itself 1,2,3....R numbers.

 

0/0=x, where x=x

 

0/0-x=0

0/0(0/0-x)=0/0(0)

0/0-0/0=0/0

 

Since virtually any number can be replaced by x, R or i, then x is R and i.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually if x=0/0, then...

since 0/0=x

 

then x-x=0, but the only way x-x=0 is if x isn't 0/0, or y/0, which defies the original

given that x=0/0

 

so the only way x=0/0 is if x=/ 0/0

 

hence the contradiction and the proof that x/0 is undefined, so I guess I was wrong... :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

False. It is undefined. Of course' date=' you are free to devise your own number system in which this statement is true, however, you must re-derive any other mathematical results that you wish to use. You can't change a definition, and apply other results in Mathematics, as if nothing else had changed.

Yes, for any given [math']b \ne 0[/math], the above statement is true, which proves that [math]0/x = 0[/math], for non-zero real [math]x[/math].

Nope. Division of two real numbers is a single-valued operation, as I mentioned in my earlier post.Nope. Again, division by [math]0[/math] is undefined so one cannot use algebraic operations on any equation that has such a term in it.

Nope. Your argument isn't even true for real numbers, thus one cannot extend a fallacious argument to the complex domain.

You're kidding, right? Do you realize that, in only 6 words, you've managed to contradict yourself?

 

 

If something is undefined then it cannot be [math]\infty[/math] because it is undefined.

 

I just realize I was contradicting myself, but tautology isn't really helpful, if all you're going to say is that 0/0 is undefined and so you can't use algebraic or arithmetic equations to prove it's undefined. That contradicts itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually if x=0/0' date=' then...

since 0/0=x

 

then x-x=0, but the only way x-x=0 is if x isn't 0/0, or y/0, which defies the original

given that x=0/0

 

so the only way x=0/0 is if x=/ 0/0

 

hence the contradiction and the proof that x/0 is undefined, so I guess I was wrong... :cool:[/quote']

 

Further extending this, we can see that 0/0 cannot be 0 either, since if it could be 0, then x can be any number which rebrings the contradiction.

 

If 0/0=0, then when we have x-x=0, 0/0-x=x-0/0, since each can be replaced with each other. If we are to apply for x=some number, for e.g. 4, then we get that 0-4=4-0, showing that -4=4, which is a contradiction. This can only lead us to suggest that x can only be 0, in which is the only case that 0/0=0 works, but since x is a variable and can be any number R, or i, then 0/0=0 is a false statement as well as 0/0=x.QED

The only thing that cannot be disproved is if 0/0=infinity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.