Is the equation right ?

[V1ncent]

Its like this:

0 = 0

1x0=2x0

By dividing 0 from both the sides ,we get:-

1 = 2

So ?

[DaStinger77]

you cannot divide by zero

[V1ncent]

why not ? you can take 0 as common !

[mark1221]

Dividing by zero is the worst mistake in the history of math.

Don't skip math classes please.

[V1ncent]

Sure thanks ! I am not a maths student btw !

[mark1221]

This is 3rd grade material dude

[Phil]

Zero means diferent things in different situations. but as said above....using zero as a divider makes no sense

[viperver1]

Completely true. 0 as a divider is completely making less sense than using other numbers.

[Caldron]

Dividing by 0 usually results in infinite (if you take one of the limits, say like 1/0+), if you consider that the axis is ring-like (a cilinder where you join both bases), so that -inf and +inf collide. The problem is that if you try to do that in that eq you will have an indetermination

[V1ncent]

Ok,Ok I get it !
Its just where I live, we are not taught about zero much (strange isn't it ,zero was found by India ).And especially about dividing by zero.

I am not too good at maths just know a little differentiation and the general things.

[skoreanime]

1x0=2x0

By dividing 0 from both the sides ,we get:-

1 = 2



(1x0)/0=(2x0)/0 is not possible...

Well, just wait until you start taking the Calculus courses, you'll have a lot of fun with 0s and derivatives...

[Phil]

lol i hated calculas. it was boring. i always liked word problems better, even though some of the logic based ones were sometimes challenging (in an entertaining way). and by the way, 1=1 and 2=2. 0 x 1 = 0

[Fadingz]

If you take zero as a scalar, then it either blasts something to infinity or shrink it to zero.
To be honest, you can't even take zero as a scalar since zero has no scale.
If you take zero as a vector, then it is in dimension zero; it has no length and is in omni-direction.
If you want to divide a number by zero, then that means you are considering the equation 0 x C = K, where C and K are two none zero real numbers.
This equation is only true when K = 0.
This is because 0 is in the zero dimension, there is nothing else other than zero in this dimension.

and your equation is wrong anyway...

if you take limit and divide by zero last:
1 * 0 = 2 * 0
1 * (0 / 0) = 2 * (0 / 0)
1 * 0 = 2 * 0
0 = 0
You end up right where you were since 0 / 0 = 0
[0 / k as k -> 0 is zero since what ever k is, 0 divide by anything is still zero]

Even if you take the limit and divide by zero first:
1 / 0 * 0 = 2 / 0 * 0
infinity * 0 = infinity * 0
0 = 0

When ever you talk about zero, it is the zero vector, not a scalar. Consequently, some equations might seem true, but you actually have a scalar equals to a vector, hence they are false as a result of some calculation error/concept error when you derive them.

[SCHUMI-4-EVA]

All the way at the start of school you are taught that you can divide zero by another number, but that the answer will always be zero.
However trying to divide a number by zero is an impossibility and the answer is always undefined.

[Raefraction]

As far as I know, if you divide by 0 the number stays as it is cos you are not dividing by anything. so 1x0 is 0, then divide by 0 it is still bloomin 0. Or written it mean:

1x0 = 0
0

It's been a while since I did Advanced Maths but Maths is pretty logical and logic dictates that dividing a number by nothing is not going to change that number cos you aren't doing anything to it. Multiplying is a little different because you are saying 3 times nothing which is still going to be nothing.

Ok... I'm starting to confuse myself now!

[skoreanime]

But 0 actually isn't 0 in calc, it's just a very, very small number. So some number divided by a very, very small number gives you what?... Infinity!

[Slayer9x9]

lol I love the number zero...

[Raefraction]

Originally Posted by Slayer9x9

lol I love the number zero...

Pah. It sucks. *sulk*

[Fadingz]

Far as I know, dividing is to multiply by the inverse of the scalar or vector,
and the inverse of a scalar or a vector is the mathamatical value which if you multiple by the number itself yields the identity matrix or the scalar one.
However, there is no space in the zero's dimension, so there is no idendity in the zero dimension; hence, you cannot take the inverse of zero.
0^-1 doesn't exist; therefore, zero division is illogical.
Sheesh, I don't even knwo if I'm making any sense atm @@"

[Raefraction]

Right, I did a Ref and Googled it. I got this:

We can use this to illustrate the problem of dividing by zero. Say you have 10 apples to distribute to zero people. How many apples does each "person" receive? An attempt to calculate \textstyle\frac{10}{0} becomes meaningless because the question itself is meaningless -- each "person" doesn't receive zero, or 10, or an infinite number of apples for that matter, because there are simply no people to receive anything in the first place. This is why as far as elementary arithmetic is concerned, division by zero is said to be meaningless, or undefined.

It is possible to disguise a special case of division by zero in an algebraic argument, leading to spurious proofs that 2 = 1 such as the following:

With the following assumptions:

0\times 1 = 0
0\times 2 = 0

The following must be true:

0\times 1 = 0\times 2

Dividing by zero gives:

\textstyle \frac{0}{0}\times 1 = \frac{0}{0}\times 2

Simplified, yields:

1 = 2\,

The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation with 0 / 0 = 1.

The multiplicative identity element, 1, has an additive inverse, -1, but the additive identity element, 0, does not have a multiplicative inverse.

If anyone understands any of that let me know. It goes on for pages about the different ways of looking at it. Check it out at:

Division by zero - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia