/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6997671
You should have also included "philosophy" and debate.

>>6997671
It's unknown/undefined.
This is a pointless thread.

>>6997671
Math is axiomatized, faggot.

>>6997674
obvious samefag

>>6997677
>Math is axiomatized, faggot.

your point?

>>6997681
In mathematics, axiomatization is the formulation of a system of statements (i.e. axioms) that relate a number of primitive terms in order that a consistent body of propositions may be derived deductively from these statements. Thereafter, the proof of any proposition should be, in principle, traceable back to these axioms.

>>6997677
>Math is axiomatized

I don't know what this means.

>>6997688

It means that the answer is undefined and it is not an opinion. There are no theories. These things have definitions, and maths rely on and rest on axioms that decide how things work. There is no opinion on what 0^something is. It is undefined. That is not up for debate.

>>6998092
>>6997687
I don't know what the fuck you're saying, but if you're gonna bable your philosphical "you cant know nuffin" please fuck off

>>6998098
6/10 would read again

A dot, then a spiral construction in spin in that, then the dot filling all the space in the middle of that: AKA a field

>>6997671
0 ?

= 0 / 2^2
= 0 / 4
= 0

gay

>>6998136

ima retard

= 1 / 0^2
= 1 / 0
= undefined

>>6998136
>>6998146

>>6998171
But
>>6998146
Is the correct answer. A negative in an exponent means that the number that is being powered is in the wrong place in regards to a fractions numerator/denominator, so it must be switched for the problem to be solved properly. Since 0 to the anything power is still 0, we get 1/0, which is undefined.

You're all wrong

>>6998187
>Is the correct answer. A negative in an exponent means that the number that is being powered is in the wrong place in regards to a fractions numerator/denominator, so it must be switched for the problem to be solved properly. Since 0 to the anything power is still 0, we get 1/0, which is undefined.
correct.

/thread

>>6998188
And who makes calculators? Engineers.

>>6998196
Are you implying conspiracy? If so, go on.

>>6998098
Oh dear god. Not sure if trolling but please read a math book

complex infinity

>>6998203
The letter engineers has 9 letters in it, with 3 syllables. Dividing them gets us 3. There are 13 letters between the e and s, 2 of which are vowels, so we add 13 to the previous 3 number and then divide it by two. Eight candles are lit on the Jewish holiday of Hanukkah, and there are 5 sections sections to the book of Psalms, one of the most important section of their holy book. Guess what else has 5 points? PENTAGRAMS. But it doesn't end there! 8 subtracted from 5 gives us 3, which is the number of Abrahamic religions in the world. ILLUMINATI AND JEWISH CONSPIRACY TO CONTROL PEOPLE THROUGH RELIGION CONFIRMED.

9 / 3 = 3
3+13 = 16
16 / 2 = 8
8 - 5 = 3
I

>>6997671
>learn to math, faggots
>the answer is -2
>0 and -2= ?
>0 - 2 = -2

Well 1/0 could be positive or negative infinity, but since it's squared, we know it's positive infinity.

>>6997671
Take the limit as x tends to zero of x^-2

Get +infinity

>>6998339
nobody asked you for a limit, wiseass. you were given an expression with no definition

>>6998092
0^any positive number is well defined

It is zero

0^-2=1/0^2
Undefined. Stupid thread.

>>6998256
1/0 is neither positive nor negative infinity

>>6999015
It's both. But any way you look at it, limit x->0 [1/(x^2)] =infinity

Unless you're dealing in complex/imaginary numbers.

Like others said, it becomes 1/0, and is thus undefined.

But couldn't (0^-2) be also written as (0/0^3), in which it isn't undefined but indeterminate?

>>6999021
1/0 is not the same as lim x->0 for 1/x.
I recommend you take a calc course if that is not clear to you.

>>6998225
8/10, lost pace a bit at the beginning but still a spectacular kektacular.

>>6997671
Undefined, as anon correctly explained before. Please post something more interesting.

>>6997671
lim x -> +0 [x^-2] = +inf
lim x -> -0 [x^-2] = -inf

>>7001110
should be lim x -> -0 [x^-2] = +inf

0^-2 = (0^-1)^2, but 0 has no multiplicative inverse

>>7001110
-0 and +0 french fuck.

>>6997677
>Math is axiomatized, faggot.

No, it isn't. That's a common misconception among philosotards who don't know shit about math. Do you even Gödel?

0^1 = 0

0^-1 = 1/0 = Complex Infinity

I remember how you deal with this shit, you use limits.

Lim (x -> 0) X^-2 = ∞

It approaches positive infinity, are you happy now?

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Lim+%28x+-%3E+0%29+X^-2&dataset=

Assuming you're working in the real numbers, this is the square of an element that is not defined, so neither is the square of the element.

anything divided by zero is infinity