[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 12 KB, 206x251, 1282196929621[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2623250 No.2623250 [Reply] [Original]

Hey Mathfags!
If 4 ÷ 2 = 2 (Because how many times can 2 go into 4, twice.)
And zero, divided by any number is zero. (0 ÷ 4 = 0)
So then any number, divided by zero, is 0. And not undifined.
Proofs are here because of inverse operations:
4 ÷ 2 = 2 also means 2 X 2 = 4
So then 0 ÷ 4 = 0 also means 0 X 4 = 0
WHICH IS CORRECT! :D
Your mind, blown.
Where's your Pythagoras now mutha fuckas?

>> No.2623266

>And zero, divided by any number is zero. (0 ÷ 4 = 0)

Ok. Guess so.

>So then any number, divided by zero, is 0. And not undifined.

How're you coming to this conclusion?

>> No.2623275

no. just no.

>> No.2623281

lol. nice try, but you're proof shows that anything multiplied by zero equals zero. It has no basis on dividing by zero.

1/10 because I actually commented troll

>> No.2623287

How many nothings can you put into 4?
Why, you can put nothing into 4 as long as you want.
Also your proof doesn't apply.
1/10. for same reason as >>2623281

>> No.2623347

>>2623250

Yes, 0/4 = 0 and 0*4 = 0

But you didn't exactly show how you derived that 4/0 = 0.

protip: it's infinity.

>> No.2623383

x / 0 = ∞

>> No.2625468

>>2623347
>>2623383

But... but no.

>> No.2625472

4/0

How many 0's can fit into a 4?
Unlimited 0's.

>> No.2625499

>>2625468

But yes. How many times can 'nothing' go into 'something'? In mathematics, infinitely.

>> No.2625504

a/b is defined as the unique number x such that it holds that a=xb. Note that if b=0, this doesn't make any sense. Hence the division operation is only defined for b not equal to zero.

>> No.2625525

>>2623347
>>2623383

no the limit of (any positive number)/x when x->0 is infinity.
you can't divide by actual zero.

i know you are just responding to a blatant troll but if you are going to, be fucking factual.

>> No.2625548

>>2625525
Wrong, the limit is undefined.

>> No.2625563

>>2625548
Well, no, if "any positive number" is fixed at C, say, then C/x does go to zero. What you're thinking of is that we could have a variable numerator which could behave differently. If the numerator is non-zero in the neighborhood of zero, it's going to go to infinity, though.

>> No.2625578

>>2625563
Nope, if x->0 from left, it's - infinity, if x->0 from right it's infinity, thus the actual x->0 limit doesn't exist.

>> No.2625596
File: 139 KB, 604x453, 1284430082883.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2625596

oh look.

another thread where people throw the word infinity around like it was a real number.

>> No.2625631

>>2625596
I was going to say it's probably being used as shorthand for "absolute size increases without band" but then I realized you're probably right :/

>> No.2625633

>>2625596

it's fine you use it in limits.

>>2625578
>>2625563

it appears i have done the same thing i told other people not to do. sorry

yes it has no limit the reason i said positive number is to make sure it's plus infinity when x->0+

anyway the point is you don't divide by zero, it's undefined at zero and only has a limit.

stupid fucking plus sign, i curse thee.

anyway not the other guy but ye i was just talking about one side of the limit.

anyway it goes to either infinity or minus infinity either way.

>> No.2625666

>>2625633
yes it is fine. a cat is fine too.

limits of real valued functions map to the extended real line, under most definitions of a limit.

but the rest is retards or underagedbanned

>> No.2625690

>>2623250
You logic is flawed

You have 4 cookies to hand out evenly to 0 people. How many cookies does each person get?

>> No.2625706

>>2625690
natural number definition of division is perhaps inappropriate when applied to things that aren't natural numbers, ie zero