1
Dividing by 0?
Dividing by 0, is it possible?
I know it's wordy but please read, I think this might change your point of view.
Also keep it nice in the comments, I know that this is a bit of a flamey topic but this is purely for fun, don't make it something that it isn't.
I know that this is a well-brushed subject but I want to share my view of it. A lot of you will say that any number divided by 0 is infinite but I say preposterous! How could that possible be infinite? Let me explain why:
First let's go to the basics of division. In essence division is just long subtraction. So regular division looks like this:
50/10
50-10 = 40
50-10 = 30
50-10 = 20
And so on... Now let's divide by 0.
50-0 = 50
50-0=50
50-0=50
50-0 = 50
See the issue? The answer always comes out to be the number put in. So why isn't the answer 50? Division is pretty much taking parts out of a whole, just like fractions. So by this "law" the answer is technically 0 because you can't nothing out a something and still have a reasonable answer. This also explains why it cannot be infinite because infinite is a concept. You cannot take a concept like infinity (which stands for every number possible) and pretend like it is a singular number like the rest of the problem. In this case you need to STICK with numbers, going into theories won't solve this.
Now we get into my solution to this. I believe that anything divided by 0 is 0. The think is that you come out with a remainder of whatever you put in. Ex:
50/0
50 - 0 = 0
It could do this an infinite amount of times but my solutions is this. Take the 50 and make that the remainder. You might wonder how you can take nothing from something and end up with something but in truth you aren't. Technically speaking, a remainder doesn't exist after division. You are only left with the number dividing returns. The remainder itself is simple a concept as well which is exactly why it fits perfectly into this problem.
Please leave your comments and ideas below, I would love to hear them.
70
I never thought I'd see a flame war about math. /lock
[deleted]
It's not infinite, it's undefined.
[deleted]
@Foxy
Sorry but I have asked you politely to stop and you didn't. I don't want this becoming spammy when we have both stated our sides and do not agree.
Sorry but I have asked you politely to stop and you didn't. I don't want this becoming spammy when we have both stated our sides and do not agree.
Please clarify things for me then, as I clearly don't understand.
What about my side do you not agree with?
50/0=0 is the same as 50=0*0 which is a false statement. Therefore your theory is flawed.
I'm all ears for a counterargument. If I truly didn't counter you then you should either be able to explain why or be able to present new information that disproves what I said.
What about my side do you not agree with?
50/0=0 is the same as 50=0*0 which is a false statement. Therefore your theory is flawed.
I'm all ears for a counterargument. If I truly didn't counter you then you should either be able to explain why or be able to present new information that disproves what I said.
But you can't just not agree after seeing clear proof.
That's like me saying that I don't think you ever made this thread or that I ever replied to it.
I know you made it and I replied to it.
I see that you made it and I replied to it.
Anyone can prove that you made it and I replied to it.
Therefore, you must have made it and I must have replied to it.
It's undeniable. To continue to disagree and believe that you didn't make it and that I did not reply to it is basically just me lying to myself and that's...just wrong. There's no common sense in an action like that. There's no logic in an action like that. There is no intelligence in an action like that.
If you have clear proof that your theory is wrong, continuing to believe that it's correct is...it just...
You just can't do that
That's like me saying that I don't think you ever made this thread or that I ever replied to it.
I know you made it and I replied to it.
I see that you made it and I replied to it.
Anyone can prove that you made it and I replied to it.
Therefore, you must have made it and I must have replied to it.
It's undeniable. To continue to disagree and believe that you didn't make it and that I did not reply to it is basically just me lying to myself and that's...just wrong. There's no common sense in an action like that. There's no logic in an action like that. There is no intelligence in an action like that.
If you have clear proof that your theory is wrong, continuing to believe that it's correct is...it just...
You just can't do that
Dude there's no way you can win this.
Countless scientists, mathematicians, engineers, etc. have already been through all of this and have proven many times in many ways that a number divided by 0 does not equal 0.
Pursuing this is a futile effort because you're just going to come up with either faulty reasoning, or the same reasoning they have for why it can't equal 0, both situations of which have come up numerous times in this thread.
It's not a "well I think..." situation. This isn't based on opinion. It either is or isn't and it isn't.
Countless scientists, mathematicians, engineers, etc. have already been through all of this and have proven many times in many ways that a number divided by 0 does not equal 0.
Pursuing this is a futile effort because you're just going to come up with either faulty reasoning, or the same reasoning they have for why it can't equal 0, both situations of which have come up numerous times in this thread.
It's not a "well I think..." situation. This isn't based on opinion. It either is or isn't and it isn't.
Ok that's enough, I have stated my point and you have stated yours. Let's just leave it at I don't agree with you.
Did you read my post?
Whoops, it slipped through. I see the point that you are trying to make but I am thinking of this in a much different way. Instead of thinking about it on a line graph, I am thinking about just the division part itself. If anything I am mostly arguing against it being infinite rather than it being null (undefined).
Doing a calculation like dividing or finding the limit of the equation at a certain point is the exact same thing. If one gives you an answer, you'll get that same answer with the other.
Again that's why I say it's not perfect. It can be disproved but I find that this is a much better alternative to saying that it is infinite. That doesn't make any sense considering that infinity stands for everything.
Since the limit of k/x as x approaches 0 (where k is any constant) goes to either infinity or negative infinity depending on which side you approach from, k/0 can't be defined.
Trust me I'm in Calc BC
Trust me I'm in Calc BC
deadrecon98FoxyYes we're talking about 50/0=0 WHICH IS THE SAME THING AS 50=0*0
There's no way around the fact that they are the same thing.
And because they are the same thing, and one of them is false, the other MUST be false as well, because it's THE EXACT SAME THING
So by this logic infinity = 0*0? Now that doesn't seem right either.
you can't use the 0*0 to define infinity because it comes from an incorrect statement to begin with. And besides, using your logic, 0*0 in this situation was supposed to equal 50, not infinity
FoxyYes we're talking about 50/0=0 WHICH IS THE SAME THING AS 50=0*0
There's no way around the fact that they are the same thing.
And because they are the same thing, and one of them is false, the other MUST be false as well, because it's THE EXACT SAME THING
So by this logic infinity = 0*0? Now that doesn't seem right either.
[deleted]
Yes we're talking about 50/0=0 WHICH IS THE SAME THING AS 50=0*0
There's no way around the fact that they are the same thing.
And because they are the same thing, and one of them is false, the other MUST be false as well, because it's THE EXACT SAME THING
There's no "disagreeing" about this. It either is or isn't. It's not an opinion.
There's no way around the fact that they are the same thing.
And because they are the same thing, and one of them is false, the other MUST be false as well, because it's THE EXACT SAME THING
There's no "disagreeing" about this. It either is or isn't. It's not an opinion.
Foxy
yes and the example
50/0=0
50=0*0 (false)
disproves your theory
Well let's just agree to disagree. I don't find that it disproves anything. We are talking strictly about 50/0, it will NEVER hold up under another type. Even the current way of saying that it is infinite isn't perfect.
deadrecon98Foxydeadrecon98There is a reason that this is called a theory. Just because it doesn't work in multiplication doesn't mean that it can't work in division. Also when you say multiply BOTH sides by 0 you only ever did the one.
SO
50 * 0 = 0*0
Correcto!
You're leaving out the fact that i said 50 was being divided by 0 to begin with
When you multiply x/y by y, you get rid of the y in the denominator. x in this situation is 50 and y in this situation is 0 so supposedly (50/0)*0 would equal 50
Again I said this is only a theory, it isn't correct on all fronts but doesn't my argument make ANY sense to you at all?
yes and the example
50/0=0
50=0*0 (false)
disproves your theory
Foxydeadrecon98There is a reason that this is called a theory. Just because it doesn't work in multiplication doesn't mean that it can't work in division. Also when you say multiply BOTH sides by 0 you only ever did the one.
SO
50 * 0 = 0*0
Correcto!
You're leaving out the fact that i said 50 was being divided by 0 to begin with
When you multiply x/y by y, you get rid of the y in the denominator. x in this situation is 50 and y in this situation is 0 so supposedly (50/0)*0 would equal 50
Again I said this is only a theory, it isn't correct on all fronts but doesn't my argument make ANY sense to you at all? I'm not saying you have to agree with me I just want you to see my point of view before dismissing my ideas.
deadrecon98There is a reason that this is called a theory. Just because it doesn't work in multiplication doesn't mean that it can't work in division. Also when you say multiply BOTH sides by 0 you only ever did the one.
SO
50 * 0 = 0*0
Correcto!
You're leaving out the fact that i said 50 was being divided by 0 to begin with
When you multiply x/y by y, you get rid of the y in the denominator, leaving you with x, not x*y. x in this situation is 50 and y in this situation is 0 so supposedly (50/0)*0 would equal 50
Have you reached algebra in school yet?
Dividing by subtraction:
ex.
50/10
50-10=40
40-10=30
30-10=20
20-10=10
10-10=0
Subtracted 5 times. So, 50/10 = 5;
(At least I think that is the proper method)
50/0
50-0=50
50-0=50
50-0=50
50-0=50
This will repeat infinity. Which ends up with 50/0 = infinity
ex.
50/10
50-10=40
40-10=30
30-10=20
20-10=10
10-10=0
Subtracted 5 times. So, 50/10 = 5;
(At least I think that is the proper method)
50/0
50-0=50
50-0=50
50-0=50
50-0=50
This will repeat infinity. Which ends up with 50/0 = infinity
How? Your answer doesn't change the first time therefore you cannot possible continue the calculations. That is why the answer is 0.
By first time, do you mean the initial 50-0=0?
Yes, I am making an assumption here that you cannot continue when your answer is 0 (Which is when you normally stop).
If I stop in the middle of the operation, then I am no longer dividing. The quotient from dividing using the subtraction method is the number of times the divisor has been subtracted from the dividend until the dividend is smaller than (or zero) than the divisor.
Again, like i've said 10 times now, it's just my take on it. I never said it was 100% foolproof.
View 1 more replies
Foxy
-SNIP-
doing the same thing with 75/5=15,
75/5=15
multiply both sides by 5
75=5*15 NOT 15*15
There is a reason that this is called a theory. Just because it doesn't work in multiplication doesn't mean that it can't work in division. Also when you say multiply BOTH sides by 0 you only ever did the one.
SO
50 * 0 = 0*0
Correcto!
deadrecon98Foxydeadrecon98Actually I think that I am choosing the wrong point to fight here. You win on that front but I actually think that say 50/0 is 0 because you can't run the calculation once. You will never get but you will never hit infinite because you can't take 0 from anything with division.
If you want to say 50/0=0, you'd have to say that 50=0*0 and that is not true
Actually no. That example ONLY works for squaring. Proof?
75 / 5 = 15
75 = 15 * 15 <== This is wrong.
I don't even...
it's literally the most basic level of algebra
50/0=0
multiply both sides by 0
50=0*0
doing the same thing with 75/5=15,
75/5=15
multiply both sides by 5
75=5*15 NOT 15*15
75=5*15 is a correct statement
this has nothing to do with exponents in this situation
Foxydeadrecon98Actually I think that I am choosing the wrong point to fight here. You win on that front but I actually think that say 50/0 is 0 because you can't run the calculation once. You will never get but you will never hit infinite because you can't take 0 from anything with division.
If you want to say 50/0=0, you'd have to say that 50=0*0 and that is not true
Actually no. That example ONLY works for squaring. Proof?
75 / 5 = 15
75 = 15 * 15 <== This is wrong.
monte carinodeadrecon98monte carinoAny number divided by zero is undefined (not infinity). Limit of a number divided by zero approaches infinity.
I agree that (at the moment) it is undefined but that is only because we, as humans, have not defined it.
*Puts on glasses* We have defined it as undefined
Or as an empty set if you want
I'm not saying that you are complete wrong but I am trying to show my reasoning as to why it SHOULD be 0, not why it is.
deadrecon98Actually I think that I am choosing the wrong point to fight here. You win on that front but I actually think that say 50/0 is 0 because you can't run the calculation once. You will never get but you will never hit infinite because you can't take 0 from anything with division.
If you want to say 50/0=0, you'd have to say that 50=0*0 and that is not true
deadrecon98monte carinoAny number divided by zero is undefined (not infinity). Limit of a number divided by zero approaches infinity.
I agree that (at the moment) it is undefined but that is only because we, as humans, have not defined it.
*Puts on glasses* We have defined it as undefined
Or as an empty set if you want
Foxydeadrecon98Searchndstroy
5 divided by 5 is 1.
Well yes I guess it is, another bad example. Let's try this then 10/5 would be 2 if we follow that rule.
10/5 is 2
Actually I think that I am choosing the wrong point to fight here. You win on that front but I actually think that say 50/0 is 0 because you can't run the calculation once. You will never hit infinite because you can't take 0 from anything with division.
monte carinoAny number divided by zero is undefined (not infinity). Limit of a number divided by zero approaches infinity.
I agree that (at the moment) it is undefined but that is only because we, as humans, have not defined it.
deadrecon98Searchndstroy
5 divided by 5 is 1.
Well yes I guess it is, another bad example. Let's try this then 10/5 would be 2 if we follow that rule.
10/5 is 2
Any number divided by zero is undefined (not infinity). Limit of a number divided by zero approaches infinity.
There is a difference between division and limits.
There is a difference between division and limits.
Foxy
5/5=1
Already caught, bad exmaple.
deadrecon98
Well yes I guess it is, another bad example. Let's try this then 10/5 would be 2 if we follow that rule.
Searchndstroy
5 divided by 5 is 1.
Well yes I guess it is, another bad example. Let's try this then 10/5 would be 2 if we follow that rule.
deadrecon98Foxy
I don't follow how 5*5 would equal 5 or 1+2 would equal 1 using that logic...
besides limits are a real and important part of math. they're not some method i made up just now to try to explain this
Ok try to follow me here. You say that (example) 5/0 is infinity because 5/0 would repeat forever. If we follow this logic however then 5/5 would be 1 because you only did the calculation once.
5/5=1
Also if you look at a graph of a function of a number divided by 0, you can clearly see that there's a vertical asymptote at 0 (i.e. y goes to infinity as it goes to 0).
[deleted]
GildedGam3rFirst of all, division is not subtracting, division is multiplying by a fraction.
Actually you are wrong. division, on it's most basic level, IS subtraction.
http://www.wikihow.com/Do-Short-Division
Foxy
I don't follow how 5*5 would equal 5 or 1+2 would equal 1 using that logic...
besides limits are a real and important part of math. they're not some method i made up just now to try to explain this
Ok try to follow me here. You say that (example) 5/0 is infinity because 5/0 would repeat forever. If we follow this logic however then 5/5 would be 1 because you only did the calculation once.
First of all, division is not subtracting, division is multiplying by a fraction.
subtracting 10 from 50 over and over is not the same as 50/10, 50/10 = 5, if you keep subtracting 10 from 50 you won't get 5, therefore your logic is faulty my good sir.
subtracting 10 from 50 over and over is not the same as 50/10, 50/10 = 5, if you keep subtracting 10 from 50 you won't get 5, therefore your logic is faulty my good sir.
Searchndstroy-snip-
EDIT:
Opposite of infinity is -infinity...
While the rest of the points you make are valid I do have to argue with this one. Infinity encompasses the entire spectrum of numbers, therefore infinity cannot be negative because it is both negative and positive.
These are treating it like a number:
limit as x approaches 0 of 1/x is infinity
and
50/0=0 Multiply both sides by 0
50=0*0 which is just 50=0 which is not true, meaning 50/0 does not equal 0
limit as x approaches 0 of 1/x is infinity
and
50/0=0 Multiply both sides by 0
50=0*0 which is just 50=0 which is not true, meaning 50/0 does not equal 0
Then how does it equal infinity? Because you had to do the calculations an infinite amount of times? That doesn't sound right, don't you agree? If we follow that logic then 5*5=5 and 1+2=1.
I don't follow how 5*5 would equal 5 or 1+2 would equal 1 using that logic...
Besides limits are a real and important part of math. They're not some method i made up just now to try to explain this. Avoiding infinite amount of calculations is something limits can be used for, just like in this situation. It's perfectly right.
Besides limits are a real and important part of math. They're not some method i made up just now to try to explain this. Avoiding infinite amount of calculations is something limits can be used for, just like in this situation. It's perfectly right.
Foxydeadrecon98Foxy-snip-
-snip snip snip-
ah I see what you were saying now with the second example, however I still don't understand your responses to the first and third part of what I said
I am pretty much saying that 0 is a number and should be treated like one.
Namechange-snip-
You are basically flipping the equation to make it opposite, therefore proving that 50/0=infinity, because 0 is the opposite of infinity.
While this may be true it doesn't prove your point. 0/50 is 0 because you are saying that there are NO parts of a 50-part WHOLE. When you divide 50 by 0 you get 0 but this time with a remainder.
View 14 more replies
