Sriman Dutta Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 Prove this- 0/0=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 13, 2016 Share Posted August 13, 2016 This thread frustrates me more than a thread is supposed to for various reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daedalus Posted August 14, 2016 Share Posted August 14, 2016 Well, technically division by zero is indeterminate and its behavior depends on the function. Considering this, we can easily show that [math]\lim_{x\rightarrow 0} \frac{2x}{x}=2[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sriman Dutta Posted August 15, 2016 Author Share Posted August 15, 2016 Right... Well, there can be another method- 0/0=1^2-1^2/1-1=(1+1)(1-1)/1-1=2 -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endy0816 Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 0/0 = 1^2-1^2/1-1 = (1+1)(1-1)/1-1 = (1+1) * (1-1)/(1-1) = 2(0/0) = ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 (edited) Right... Well, there can be another method- 0/0=1^2-1^2/1-1=(1+1)(1-1)/1-1=2 There is so much so wrong with this. For the record: 1² - 1²/1 - 1 = -1 So you say 0/0 = -1 Which is very obviously false and since you have not proven this in a lemma before, it is incorrect to use this in your proof. You seem to have a little problem using parentheses. You also state that (1+1)(1-1)/1-1 = 2 Let's continue with what it says: (1+1)(1-1)/1 - 1 = 2 2 * 0/1 - 1 = 2 -1 = 2 Obviously false. Let's continue with what I think you mean: (1+1)(1-1)/(1-1) = 2 (1+1)(0)/(0) = 2 2 * 0/0 = 2 Which you cannot use since you try to prove that 0/0 = 2, and now it states that 2 * 0/0 = 2. Such thing can never be true. As stated before, 0/0 is undefined and will never be. Edited August 15, 2016 by Function Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sriman Dutta Posted August 15, 2016 Author Share Posted August 15, 2016 Instead of taking (1-1)=0, we can cancel it out from the numerator and denominator. It is not an 'exact' maths, so just a twisting problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 There is no such things as "not an exact" maths. It is false to cancel out (1-1)/(1-1) as that is, undeniably, the same as 0/0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endy0816 Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 Can cancel out because x/x=1. You can see quickly begin to see the problems allowing division by zero introduces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 15, 2016 Share Posted August 15, 2016 Can cancel out because x/x=1. [math]\Leftrightarrow x\neq 0[/math] And in no other case. And since [math]x=1-1=0[/math], it is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freekundli Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 0/0 can be anything. like:0*2 = 0i.e: 0/0 = 2.Now:0*x = 0 or 0/0 = X, where x can take any damn value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 0/0 can be anything. like: 0*2 = 0 i.e: 0/0 = 2. Now: 0*x = 0 or 0/0 = X, where x can take any damn value. I'm not convinced that that is true. But I generally don't feel the need to go into discussion with someone from India when it comes to maths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) Comment withdrawn Edited August 24, 2016 by Commander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted August 24, 2016 Share Posted August 24, 2016 Comment withdrawn Boo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joatmon Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 (edited) (2*(6-(3*2)))/ (1*(8-(4*2))) should do it or if you would prefer it to equal 3:- (3*(6-(3*2)))/(1*(8-(4*2))) Edited September 4, 2016 by Joatmon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 I'm not convinced that that is true. But I generally don't feel the need to go into discussion with someone from India when it comes to maths. What has India got to do with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Function Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 What has India got to do with it? Just another lame stereotype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now