Lounge: Why can't I divide by zero?

[KitchenWitch]

[mcscajun]

1. You need to ask that over in GD.

You'll get piled on properly there.

:rofl:




on edit: I'm waiting for the lounge denizen who asks: Who SAYS you can't? It's bound to happen.

[Chichiri]

2. You can, but . . .

the universe will be destroyed in the process.

[GOPisEvil]

3. Invent your own mathematics. The Greeks did.

The reason we never invented another one is that we're lazy. Take some initiative and invent your own math where you can divide by zero.

:silly:

[usedtobesick]

4. simplest answer...

how can you have a fraction of zero... it's the only number you can't have a piece of..

[Greyhound]

15. Go Broncos! Did they beat SF? No coverage here &

I can't sit through sportcenter (even if my girlfriend let me) :kick:

[usedtobesick]

20. I don't know..

I just got back tonight from Camping in Breckenridge and have not heard. I think they did..

[usedtobesick]

22. Just got the update...

Bronco's won but I have no score....

[Greyhound]

23. Cool. Thanks. n/t

[existentialist]

28. Yes, the Broncos won, but

The real story about the game (and the only reason that I knew) was because one of the San Francisco offensive linemen collapsed and died after the game.

[existentialist]

29. No.

Division by zero is undefined because there is no way to distinguish between an infinite number of possible answers.

It is however, possible to take zero and divide it by anything (and the answer is always zero--half of nothing is nothing.)

[usedtobesick]

57. that is the downfall of oversimplification

but your right. My point was that the answer is always 0.

[ltfranklin]

5. The answer to that age old question...

Because It's NOT There!

[ugarte]

6. You're not old enough

:)

[rug]

7. Same reason Bush can't win in Iraq.

Impossible.

[Elidor]

8. Zero is your little invisible buddy

He doesn't do anything, and he doesn't have anything to do with anything, so it's really just you and him. Whenever he pops up, special rules override everything you've ever learned. He casually destroys everything before him and asks you not to mind the mess.

[Benhurst]

9. Because only

Republicans can deal with such nothingness.

[Burma Jones]

10. Because it's Infinity and I'm already driving one

[Pale Blue Dot]

11. Who cares? One is the loneliest number that you'll ever do.

:shrug:

[melnjones]

12. Well, how many zeros are in any number, 10 for example?

How much nothing is in something (in this case, 10)? It wouldn't make sense to say there's one nothing, or two nothings. The only answer that would make any sense is to say there are NO NOTHINGS in something. There are zero zeros in 10. 10/0 = 0. Now reverse that. Is 0x0=10? If you have nothing zero times, it means you DON'T have nothing, so you have something. 0x0 = something. We don't know what though. There's no way to know, as I guess that something could be anything. So if 10/0 = 0, then 0x0 = 10 would have to be true, and it's not true exclusively, so that's why you can't divide by zero. Or at least that's what makes sense to me:-)

[short bus president]

13. you can

you just can't comprehend the answer.

[Tallison]

30. The quotient is just infinity, right?

What's infinity, an imaginary, complex, unreal, useless, or impractical number or what?

[alarcojon]

32. None of the above

Math phobe warning: the following post contains math! If you avoid math like the plague, skip to the next post!

Complex and imaginary numbers are the same thing: they contain a real number plus a real number multiplied by the square root of -1, which is not a real number.

No such thing as an "unreal" number, but if you mean a number that is not real, I would answer that infinity is not a number (more on that in a moment).

Infinity is anything but useless or impractical.

Typically, infinity is not a number at all, but the concept of an entity greater than any real number you can write down. The real number line extends infinitely to the right (positive infinity) and to the left (negative infinity).



These two infinities lead to problems when trying to divide by 0. For example, think of 1/0. Since you can't actually divide by 0 (see post 26), the best you can do is divide by something increasingly closer to 0 and see if your results tend to get closer and closer to some value. For example:

1/.1=10
1/.01=100
1/.001=1000

and so on. What we see here is that the results get larger and larger, and as large as we could want. We describe this process as "going to (positive) infinity," but that doesn't make (positive) infinity a number, just an aid to understanding a specific process.

But why divide by positive numbers?

1/-.1=-10
1/-.01=-100
1/-.001=-1000

etc. These values go to negative infinity. So, in general, dividing by something close to 0 can lead to a large positive number or a large negative number, so the behavior is indeterminate, so there is no well-defined answer.

[Tallison]

38. Is zero a real number?

Or a number at all then? Just wondering, since unlike infinity it does have a determinite value. And what's the point in trying to define unreal numbers like the square root of a negative?

(Thanks for the previous post; I love the philosophical implications of math) :D

[alarcojon]

42. Yes, zero is a real number

It has a specific location along the real number line, unlike (positive or negative) infinity, which is just the "end" of the line, which is never actually reached.

As far as defining the square root of a negative, there are many reasons, but perhaps the easiest to explain is so that every polynomial has a root. For example, the polynomial x^2-9 has two roots, x=3 and x-3. However, x^2+9 has no real roots, since no real number squared plus nine gives 0 as an answer. However, if we let i represent the square root of -1, then 3i and -3i are roots of x^2+9; for example (3i)^2+9=(3^2)(i^2)+9=(9)(-1)+9=0. The fact that every polynomial has roots allows us to use some other algebraic tools to explore the real number system more deeply.

[Tallison]

44. I can see the logic after concentrating

hard and methodically working through your explanation, but the axioms are hardly self-evident to my brain.

How intuitively does this all make sense to you?

[alarcojon]

50. It's been drilled into my head after years of training

I also know what motivates many "strange" mathematical concepts, so they seem natural to me.

John Von Neumann once said: In mathematics, you don't understand things, you just get used to them.

[Rabrrrrrr]

51. Without the square roots of negatives, you would not have electricity

Electrical engineering cannot be done without resorting to imaginary numbers.

Without the number i (or, as EEs call it, j, since we use i for current), the math for electricity (from power lines to computers to signal processing to everything) would be so impossible. Without i (or j), we would still be back at generic DC generation running shitty little useless light bulbs at incredible cost of energy, resources, and money, and that would be it.

[I Have A Dream]

48. Are you a teacher? If you're not, you'd make a great one.

This was really clear and easy to follow. It all makes sense now.

Thanks! It's so nice to understand yet another thing in this weird universe that is ours. :)

[alarcojon]

55. Yes, I teach college math

Thanks for the positive feedback!

[smiley_glad_hands]

14. The answer to this can only be found

inside W's brain.

[Democrats_win]

16. When you divide by zero, 1=2. Proof:

Let a=b

multiply by a: ab = a^2

subtract b^2: ab-b^2 = a^2 -b^2

factor: b(a-b)=(a+b)(a-b)

divide by (a-b): b = a+b

use a = b: b = 2b

divide by b: 1 = 2

[sir_captain]

24. heh

took me a second to find the flaw...that's clever

[leftofthedial]

17. Zero is nothing to divide by, young lady

the consequences are unimaginable

well, no they are actually not unimaginable

but they ARE unpleasant!

[Ptah]

18. Division is just subtracting

and keeping track of how many times you subtract.

4/2=2 is the same as
4-2=2 (count one)
2-2=0 (count two)

When you try to divide by zero you keep subtracting
zero and keep counting; there is no end
4-0=4 (count one)
4-0=4 (count two)
4-0=4 (count three)

It never ends.

:shrug:

[alarcojon]

26. Nice explanation!

I am a math prof. This question comes up at times. I usually go with the "division is the opposite of multiplication" tack; as in: if 1/0 equals x, then 1=0 times x; and there is no such x.

[Ptah]

49. Thanks, alarcojon.

I'm just a shop rat (machinist, weldor).
It's important for someone making things from meatal
to understand the fundamentals.
And I have a lot of fun with basic algebra and geometry.


:thumbsup:

[hfojvt]

27. aha, but what about 0/0?

0 - 0 = 0 (count 1)

So, you can divide by zero, but you need to use the calculus to do so. Limit (h to 0) (sine h)/h = 1. Limit (b to a) (a-b)/(a-b) = 1

[alarcojon]

31. calculus gives an answer only in the limit

there is still a singularity at 0 itself.

[hfojvt]

33. Not if you use Abel. n/t

[alarcojon]

34. Hey, let's keep it at the undergraduate level, eh

either a topologist or a non-standard analyst, among others, can work further wonders.

[hfojvt]

37. that was undergraduate, I only have a BA in math

I remember nothing about Abel, only the way the prof would say "Ah, but we have Abel". As far as I was concerned, he was the only one who had Abel. I could never get into those classes. It was 'prove that this function is continuous" and I was like "why? Who cares if it is continuous or not?

But PM me if you are from the U of Mn.

[corporatemedia]

19. secret service won't let you stand near bush while you do your math. eom

[JVS]

21. You can, but the result is always "undefined"

[uppityperson]

25. Nevermind, I can.

[KamaAina]

35. Because all your answers* would equal infinity?

Just wondering...

[alarcojon]

36. Which one?

See post 32

[eyesroll]

39. The answer I gave the 8-year-old I tutored in college:

Because you can't divide something into zero groups. You have at least a tiny fraction of a group if you have something to start with.

Why you can't divide zero into zero groups, I don't know.

[RPM]

40. what are you dividing by

thats why

[In_The_Wind]

41. because

nuthin' into nuthin' still leaves nuthin'



good one KW !

[ProfessorGAC]

43. Because It Says So In The Bible

It's in there somewhere. Maybe near the back, or in the appendix. So, just don't do it. I'm not kidding. Don't do it.
The Professor

[sendero]

45. Because..

.... you will get a "Floating Point Exception".

And that is almost as bad as an "Illegal Operation" :)

[Dave Reynolds]

46. Good question,

because if you can multiply by, add, and subtract zero..why NOT divide?

I think it is the fault of the Clenis.

[KitchenWitch]

52. Sure, blame the Clenis

WTF did the Clenis ever do to YOU! :P

[kodi]

47. dammit! this is America, do what you want to.

.

[Rabrrrrrr]

53. Because dividing by zero has no meaning

What's the point in asking "how many times can I remove nothing from this pile of stuff?"

A) you can't remove "nothing", because "nothing" doesn't exist
b) if you COULD remove "nothing", you could remove it an infinite number of times without changing the initial state of the stuff from which you are removing it; and if you can do it an infinite number of times, without any alteration to the state of the stuff, then the action has no meaning.

[Redstone]

54. Because, Madam KW, there's no way to figure out

how many time nothing goes into something else.

Unless, maybe you're talking about bushyboy's sex life ("nothing going into something else," get it, ha ha?)

Dang, I'm getting tired right here. That may have been the single worst pun ever attempted.

Redstone

[mcscajun]

56. Nevermind GD...you got properly 'piled on' right here.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

58. Because the Pet Shop Boys already did that song.

Damn, it was the first track on their first album!