1=2

[مصطفى-mustfa No.11799020]

am sorry its just a joke

[Anonymous No.11799030]

if both sides aren't equal then your answer is automatically wrong

[Anonymous No.11799035]

Since 2 does not equal 1 you have proven that all infinities are not equal.

[مصطفى-mustfa No.11799051]

cool am the new einstein thine hahah thanks you for reply

[Anonymous No.11799077]

>>11799020
zero is a crutch

[مصطفى-mustfa No.11799087]

i dont understand put than you for reply

[Anonymous No.11799203]

>>11799087
zero makes math easy for humans
zero not used by ancients
zero has many non sense edge cases

[Anonymous No.11799207]

>>11799020
Reminder that the Greeks rejected the notion of 0.

[Anonymous No.11799247]

>>11799020
Would this suffice as a proof by contradiction of why you can't divide by zero?

[Anonymous No.11799255]

>>11799247
You can divide by zero.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_sphere

[Anonymous No.11800185]

>>11799255
1) You can divide by zero... in any ring that isn't an integral domain. R is a field, so it's an integral domain and hence you can't divide by 0.
2) The Riemann sphere doesn't even act the way OP is pretending it does. 0 x infinity is undefined for the same reason OP tried to use to justify this horrible thread: it doesn't have a singular value and hence is meaningless to define let alone think about just based on how the algebra works in the sphere.

[Anonymous No.11800193]

>>11799020
You can't divide by 0, it's undefined.

[Anonymous No.11800785]

>>11799020
infinity is a concept not a number and you just can't by zero

[Anonymous No.11800804]

>>11799035
>all infinities are not equal.
True black infinities have a lower average IQ and just can't behave like people.

[Anonymous No.11800816]

>>11800785
A number is a concept too, infinity can be used in the context of a number, but the rules are a bit different when dealing with infinity, similar to how the rules are a bit different when dealing with zero. Whether infinity is a number entirely depends on your mathematical definition of what a number is. If you can come up with a concise definition of a number which would work for all naturals, integers, fractions, irrationals, transcendentals, negatives, and imaginaries while also exempting infinity as technicallyt being a number, I would find that quite commendable.

[Anonymous No.11800821]

>>11800785
>infinity is a concept not a number
I swear this is one of the most retarded phrases I keep hearing

[Anonymous No.11800834]

>>11800821
Surely you'd have no problem pointing to it on a number line then.

[Anonymous No.11800870]

>>11800834
it's not wrong. just retarded

[Anonymous No.11800909]

Infinity is an axiom, not a number.

[Anonymous No.11800920]

>>11799020
How can zero children have an infinite number of apples each? They can't. 1/0 is not infinite, but rather has no answer. Back to highschool asshole.

[Anonymous No.11800932]

>>11800834
I would just go ahead here and point towards the right end of the thing.

[Anonymous No.11801004]

>>11799077
You take that back, Abe!

[Anonymous No.11801104]

Let u=1/0

1/0=u
a/0=a*1/0=au
u*0=1
au*0=a
What's wrong with this?

[Anonymous No.11801367]

You can't divide by zero retard it's undefined

[Anonymous No.11801412]

>>11801104
The only way to properly define infinity is in the context of a single linear fractional transformation on the Riemann sphere.
If we consider the canonical map f(z)=1/z, then we define infinity to be the image of f at 0, so as to make f biholomorphic on the Riemann sphere. Or in your words, u = 1/0. Similarly, u is just the preimage of 0 by f.
u is only well-defined in the domain of f and f-inverse, you can't just yolo "u*0", it's ill-defined.

The wikipedia article is quite good and got me through the start of a grad class on complex variables.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%B6bius_transformation

[Anonymous No.11802308]

>>11799020
Wow another thread full of brainlets that don't understand limits.

[Anonymous No.11802910]

>>11801004
nice pic, i'll expand, zero isn't a number it the balance of all numbers, a vector equilibrium, well represented by the cuboctahedron

[Anonymous No.11803137]

>>11800932
Oh, so infinite is the cardinality of a set, rather than a number? That's exactly what he was saying.

[Anonymous No.11803446]

No.

1/0 would be undefined
infinity times 0 would be 0
2/0 would be undefined
infinity times 0 would be 0
2=/=1

[Anonymous No.11803460]

All you've done it prove that 1 and 2 have the same cardinality or ordinality or something

[Anonymous No.11804245]

>>11799020
How is 1/0= infinity?
1/(-1) = -1; 1/(-0.5) = -2...
1/0 = negative infinity, you dunce.