I read an article that shows how one can indeed divide by zero. They also proved why you can, not just how you can. Their reasoning behind not allowing it was that if you *do* divide by zero you get irrational statements like 4=0. Naturaly, as humans we can only think within the box. This exact same theory is what the fourth dimension is based off of. If I can find the article I will post a link but I have had some trouble locating it. If anybody knows what I am talking about go ahead and post the link.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zok:
I read an article that shows how one can indeed divide by zero. They also proved why you can, not just how you can. Their reasoning behind not allowing it was that if you *do* divide by zero you get irrational statements like 4=0. Naturaly, as humans we can only think within the box. This exact same theory is what the fourth dimension is based off of. If I can find the article I will post a link but I have had some trouble locating it. If anybody knows what I am talking about go ahead and post the link.

---

hurry! post it! post it! i want i want! I've got a nasty div/0 bug in a program i'm writing and this might save me the trouble of fixing it. science is cool.

The way i think of it, 4/0 is 0 since it is 0 4 times. how many times does 4 go into 0? 0 times! how many times does 0 go into 4? 0 times! (or infinite times if you wanna play it that way)

I would still have to insist that it is undefined, basically since according to my knowledge (granted I am only in trig), there are no real answers when you divide by zero. I would love to see a counterexample, PLEASE POST!

in first year calculus there are some instances where "imaginary numbers" are used, such as the square root of negative one. these numbers do not exist mathematically but they are sometimes used to help simplify complex equations. so using numbers that do not exist is not unprecedented.

oh yeah, first year calculus also assumes that in the equation x=a/h where a is any non-zero number as h approaches zero (limit h->0) x=infinity

I am familiar with imaginary numbers as well, we had a unit on them last year in algebra II. However, I do not see how these could be used when dividing by 0. For those of you that don't know i simply means the square root of -1. I am familiar with asymptotes as well, but even in a function that creates an asymptote 0 is still undefined.

Again, I am very interested in this and look forward to seeing this article.

Indeed. Please find and post!

Though I would feel slightly dubious about this method until I've seen it, as division by zero being defined would solve *so* many mathematical and physical problems that it would probably be quite big news.....

I think a bunch of us know you CAN divide by zero, it's just that you don't get a logical or defined answer. We can't process it. Though, then again, the way math was created you can't divide by nothing. You'd get into higher levels of math or new levels of math.

As I recal, to prevent irrational statements like 0=4 and stuff like that, they created a special annotation for 0 division, similar to i

It would seem to me that any number divided by zero would equal infinity, and in turn infinity multiplied by zero could equal any number at all. Because infinity is a mathmatical abstract it would seem to fit in fine with a formula that demands an abstract answer.

What I wanna see, is the graph of a function with division of 0 involved.

It would probably be 4th dimesional though (aka hard to draw).

Oh and I might add that it is commonly accepted that the 4th dimension is 'time'. So now think about how to draw the graph!

Dimensions are units of measurement. A dimension can be anything like time, distance, children per family or price. You can't say that the 4. dimension is time, this is only true for some physical systems.

a/x goes to infinity if x GOES to zero(lim(x->0) a/x)This doesn't mean that a/0 is infinity. This is imortant and if you don't belive me consider the graph of f(x) = 1/x !

Even in physics the 4th dimention isn't always time.

What I wanna see, is the graph of a function with division of 0 involved.


Graph (2x-3)/(3x-3)

When x equals 1, there will be a discontinuity because (3(1)-3)=0
and at this point it will be undefined.

You'll just have a little open space at x equals one, and then line will continue.

My god, fathomshot, you really have to improve your math a bit. First the 1/I=R/V and now this!

That graph isn't like this. You don't have a small undefined dot in the middle of a regular curve, but you have a vertical asymptote at x=1. The graph goes to + infinity from left and to - infinity from right (and is of course undefined at x=1)

(Come to think of it, the two mistakes are kinda similar. Also for 1/I=R/V, zero in denominator isn't just one undefined point, but the graph goes to infinity. You really do have a problem with division by zero.)

An example for a graph involving an undefined (omitted) point in a regular curve is y=(6x-6)/(3x-3). The graph is a horizontal line at y=2 with a small omitted point (shown with a small hollow circle on the line) at the coordinates (1,2) [assuming you won't understand it, it means x=1, y=2].
Another example is (9x^2-9)/(3x-3) which is a line with the slope 3, intersection with y at (0,3) and an omitted-undefined point at (1,6)