How to divide by zero

[awesome31312]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.
Example: 0/2 = 0

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

[nsimmons]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined. The division algorithm states
a=bq + r, where b|a (b divides a), The set of R/0 is not closed under division, or the multiplication inverse.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

The whole process shoudl be restricted to integers anyway to eliminate irrational numbers in the real set.

[awesome31312]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

I meant 0/x = 0

[BoscoBlue]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

I meant 0/x = 0

Can nothing be divided?

[awesome31312]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

I meant 0/x = 0

Can nothing be divided?

Anything can be divided, that includes nothing.

[nsimmons]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

I meant 0/x = 0

Can nothing be divided?

This is a different question, yes 0 can be divided.
By the division algorithm

a = bq+r, can this equation be made true for a=0? Of course

0=bq + r
0 = 0*0 +0

or

0 = -1*1 +1

or any other combination. If the algorithm can be satisfied any combination is divisible

[source]
http://www.fmf.uni-lj.si/~lavric/Rosen%20-%20Elementary%20number%20theory%20and%20its%20applications.pdf

[Balthazar]

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminate_form#Indeterminate_form_0.2F0

[nsimmons]

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminate_form#Indeterminate_form_0.2F0

good old sinx/x, used this for solid state energy band structures.

[awesome31312]

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminate_form#Indeterminate_form_0.2F0

Whoo

Thank you for sharing!

[nsimmons]

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminate_form#Indeterminate_form_0.2F0

Whoo

Thank you for sharing!

This is covered in your first calculus course. Find a text, stewart, online.

[dank]

Thank you sir, you just made me aware of mathematical proof of god.

[(oYo)]

Everyone knows well enough not to feed the trolls, but nooooooOOOOOooooooooo, you just HAAaad to do it. You just had to teach dank about indeterminate forms.

Great, now dank (and pretty soon every other godbot) thinks they've got a new god toy. MATH!    

[awesome31312]

Everyone knows well enough not to feed the trolls, but nooooooOOOOOooooooooo, you just HAAaad to do it. You just had to teach dank about indeterminate forms.

Great, now dank (and pretty soon every other godbot) thinks they've got a new god toy. MATH!    

Would you like to swap a sticker for those hipster points?

[vm1990]

if you divide 0 by zero and get the correct answer the universe will implode... no one has got it yet thats why were still here

[(oYo)]

if you divide 0 by zero and get the correct answer the universe will implode... no one has got it yet thats why were still here

Right! That's the Big Crunch and when multipling by zero it explodes, as in The Big Bang. That's why we all agreed the answer was zero. Did I miss a memo? 
I always hate living in reverse time...   

[seattlenonsmoker]

The part about this that bugs me is that multiplication and division by everything except zero is also a scalar - repeated process of addition or subtraction respectively modifying the magnitude of the function respectively - but 2-0-0-0-0-0-0-0 is still 2. DERP!

Shout outs to indeterminate and epsilon-delta def.

[Josepht]

For those who still don't understand:

Lets say 1/1 = 1. Eeasy right?
Now try to follow the next calculations:
1/0.1 = 10
1/0.01 = 100
1/0.001 = 1000
1/0.0001 = 1000
And so on.
The smaller the number you divide by, the larger the outcome is.

Example: 1/0.000000000000000000001 = 1000000000000000000000

So when you divide by a number which is a million times smaller then the previous one, your outcome will be a million times larger.
The closer you get to 'divide by zero', the larger the outcome is.  You can keep doing this for infinite time, but you'll never reach zero before all energy in this universe is used.

[awesome31312]

For those who still don't understand:

Lets say 1/1 = 1. Eeasy right?
Now try to follow the next calculations:
1/0.1 = 10
1/0.01 = 100
1/0.001 = 1000
1/0.0001 = 1000
And so on.
The smaller the number you divide by, the larger the outcome is.

Example: 1/0.000000000000000000001 = 1000000000000000000000

So when you divide by a number which is a million times smaller then the previous one, your outcome will be a million times larger.
The closer you get to 'divide by zero', the larger the outcome is.  You can keep doing this for infinite time, but you'll never reach zero before all energy in this universe is used.

Oh, "negative" should be thought of as "logical not" as in the following emboldened:

The part about this that bugs me is that multiplication and division by everything except zero is also a scalar - repeated process of addition or subtraction respectively modifying the magnitude of the function respectively - but 2-0-0-0-0-0-0-0 is still 2. DERP!

Shout outs to indeterminate and epsilon-delta def.

Introducing two into itself no times leaves one with nothing. Removing two from itself no times so leaves one with [that logical not of] nothing.

if you divide 0 by zero and get the correct answer the universe will implode... no one has got it yet thats why were still here

x ÷ 0 = −0

A less confusing notation would be the !

[BADecker]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined. The division algorithm states
a=bq + r, where b|a (b divides a), The set of R/0 is not closed under division, or the multiplication inverse.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

The whole process shoudl be restricted to integers anyway to eliminate irrational numbers in the real set.

Right!  If you divide something by 0, that's the same as dividing it by nothing. If something isn't divided, the thing that is left is the original something, right? Therefore, 2/0=2.

[BADecker]

Consider these mathematical laws:

1) Any real number, when divided by zero, produces modulus and quotient zero.

2) Any real number multiplied by zero is equal to zero.

Therefore, it logically follows, that zero divided by zero is equal to zero.

Premise 1 is false, it presupposes you can divide by zero, this operation is undefined. The division algorithm states
a=bq + r, where b|a (b divides a), The set of R/0 is not closed under division, or the multiplication inverse.

R/0 is an indeterminate form. It is undefined. A limiting process can be applied to an indeterminate form, but remember the episilon-delta proof, the limit never actually gets to zero, only "as close as we like"

The whole process shoudl be restricted to integers anyway to eliminate irrational numbers in the real set.

Right!  If you divide something by 0, that's the same as dividing it by nothing. If something isn't divided, the thing that is left is the original something, right? Therefore, 2/0=2.

   Arithmatical division is both the taking and making of groups.

   An arithmatical quotient is that number of groups made or taken.

∴ That number of groups of nothing one can take and make from any something is absolute - indeed, that exact opposite of nothing, "−0."

Oh, play the mathematical BS. This is the exact reason stuff is so confounded.

Take 10 Arabs in the desert. Divide their number by 2 and you get 2 groups of 5, right. Since "0" is nothing, divide them by nothing and they are not divided, right? So, there are still 10 Arabs, right?

English has its characteristic laws that don't make any sense. Mathematics is a language that has characteristic laws that don't make any sense as well. It's the reason that we have flaws in our thinking.