Dividing by zero

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:17 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:31 elements, not groups/divisions.

There are no existents, no states, in multiplication and division. You are speaking of different operations -- ones you made up, invented, imagined, created in your head.


Ok we'll work with the term "elements"

If 31 elements are distributed equally into (amongst) zero groups... How is that not either 31 or 0????

Undefined is the least likely option of the three, 31 is the most likely option.

What you didn't get through to you, and I thought I was clear...

Math has more than one axiomatic system foundationally...

I don't know why that bothers you
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6785
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:25 pm

If 31 elements are distributed equally into (amongst) zero groups... How is that not either 31 or 0????


Because the result of division is the number of elements within each one of the groups. We are counting the number of elements within groups, not the number of elements outside of these groups. When there are no groups, there is nothing to count, therefore, the result is undefined.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:30 pm

I don't know why that bothers you


You are accusing people of being brainwashed simply because you do not understand that you are working with different, non-conventional, operations.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:30 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:
If 31 elements are distributed equally into (amongst) zero groups... How is that not either 31 or 0????


Because the result of division is the number of elements within each one of the groups. We are counting the number of elements within groups, not the number of elements outside of these groups. When there are no groups, there is nothing to count, therefore, the result is undefined.


Ok, that's better said.

If I say I have no bananas...

It's actually a placeholder for bananas that still exist somewhere.

Bananas still exist in order to assert them in some way.

Does that help?
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6785
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby surreptitious57 » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:45 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
If 31 elements are distributed equally into ( amongst ) zero groups ... How is that not either 31 or 0 ???

Undefined is the least likely option of the three 31 is the most likely option

31 elements divided [ distributed equally ] into 0 groups is nonsense as it does not compute so cannot be 31 or 0

Anything divided by 0 [ apart from 0 ] is nonsense [ integers / reals / irrationals / complex ]

0 divided by 0 is 0 so is not nonsense but everything else is
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:05 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby surreptitious57 » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:50 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
0 divided by 0 is 0 so is not nonsense but everything else is

0 divided by 0 is also 1 and infinity so three answers for one sum
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:05 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 17, 2016 5:56 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:
If 31 elements are distributed equally into ( amongst ) zero groups ... How is that not either 31 or 0 ???

Undefined is the least likely option of the three 31 is the most likely option

31 elements divided [ distributed equally ] into 0 groups is nonsense as it does not compute so cannot be 31 or 0

Anything divided by 0 [ apart from 0 ] is nonsense [ integers / reals / irrationals / complex ]

0 divided by 0 is 0 so is not nonsense but everything else is


Did you read my bananas post??

Zero is the abstraction of "placeholder"

So when I say I have zero bananas...

Is that absurd??

We do it everyday!!

We however, cannot possibly utter that sentence unless bananas exist!!!

I'm actually not trying to be controversial here!!!

I'm saying there are DIFFERENT axiomatic schemes on the fundamentals - not just one!!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6785
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby surreptitious57 » Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:18 pm

Ecmandu this is getting silly. Now everyone is telling you that you are wrong but you are not listening to them. You have to realise
that maths is useless unless there is universal agreement on the function of its axioms and everyone here know this apart from you
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 2:05 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:48 pm

If you say you have no bananas, it means precisely that: that you have no bananas. It does not mean there are bananas existing elsewhere.

If I say I have no dragons, it does not mean dragons exist elsewhere. We know dragons do not exist.

See how stupid you are?

If you can imagine something that does not mean it must be real.

And I do not see how any of this is relevant.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3553
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:27 pm

Oh my...

There are imaginary dragons. And as you learn more about existence, the imaginary is real somewhere...

*sigh*
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6785
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Meno_ » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:30 pm

Something contingent here.

The concept of existence Becomesrelevant issue here.
The consciessness which makes meaning manifest in
this context, brings the patent theory of meaning to the fore, thereby 'existence' gains meaning.

Which brings to the fore the the idea of 0 as symbolic of nothingness. A nothingness which has a double value: a conceptual nothingness, and a functional nothingness.

How does this relate to consciousness of the void qua nothingness, as a lack of existence?

The significance of this train of thought lies in another difference, but one which subsumed the former, vis: conscience as a self differentiating function, or as a pre-existing field of possibility.

In the later case, the field or whatever you designate it, 'exists' prior, not in the temporal sense, of course,
but in the sense of a a shift away from a quantifiable difference.

This difference is evident in the sharp difference in the awareness of human beings away from animals.

The quanta(fiability) has changed the quality of awareness to a high degree and has progressed to the awareness of the in-it's self, as a probable field.

In this sense, the idea of 0 , as nothingness, has gained a material substance.

You can divide by this, but it is always self consuming, and always results with the same result, = 1. It is the most basic logical equation, the law of identity.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:39 pm

Jerkey ...

You're a lot smarter than these guys .

It's actually more complex than that.

This is the third time I've said it in this thread...

The foundation of math has more than one axiom set
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6785
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Meno_ » Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:46 pm

I hate to agree with you for the appearance of a necessary presumption, but if you don't get side-railed, then there is no danger of a misinterpretation.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby alan1000 » Sun Dec 25, 2016 1:09 pm

I'm not a mathematician so bear with my inexperience... but I don't think that anybody here has actually stipulated which definition of "0" they are working with?

If 0 is understood as a Robinson infinitesimal in non-standard analysis, then 2/0 does indeed equal infinity, and 0/2 does indeed equal 0 (I think. I'm not pretending I understand non-standard analysis - I read about it in a book). On the other hand, if 0 is considered as "the null set", the expression 0/2 is simply not admissible because the null set does not contain 2 subsets. (In fact you might like to argue, just to be mischievous, that to be divisible by 2, the null set would have to contain three subsets - can you guess why?)
alan1000
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 12:10 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Meno_ » Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:13 pm

Mathematics is another language altogether, and what you expressed pretty well describes the philosophical underpinnings of the different meanings of 0. Mathematically, 0 deals with value in the abstract, whereas 0=nothingness deals with the
s
ubstantial, philosophical underpinnings of meaning.

So we are in essence speaking in similar subsumed equivalencies.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby alan1000 » Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:22 pm

OK guys, I'll buy you another round of drinks, and leave you to it!
alan1000
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 12:10 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby James S Saint » Tue Dec 27, 2016 6:55 pm

Ahh.. someone with at least a tiny bit of education...

alan1000 wrote:I'm not a mathematician so bear with my inexperience... but I don't think that anybody here has actually stipulated which definition of "0" they are working with?

If 0 is understood as a Robinson infinitesimal in non-standard analysis, then 2/0 does indeed equal infinity,

That could be true except to refer to hyperreal numbers requires that one use hyperreal notation or at very least specify such. A variety of hyperreal notations have been offered by pretty well known mathematicians. I have my own notation (for philosophical reasons). And another thing that is required, although unknown to many mathematicians, is logic. Mathematics is a subset of logic and cannot defy logic in its construction without becoming incoherent and useless.

alan1000 wrote:and 0/2 does indeed equal 0 (I think. I'm not pretending I understand non-standard analysis - I read about it in a book).

Again, if using proper notation, "0" is undefined because the "degree of 0" isn't being specified.
0.000...:000 / 2 would still be 0.000...:000
or my own notation:
[0.000...:0R] / 2 = [0.000...:0R] {R == "eternally Remaining amount for sake of non-ending decimals"}.

alan1000 wrote:On the other hand, if 0 is considered as "the null set", the expression 0/2 is simply not admissible because the null set does not contain 2 subsets.

That is an excellent observation, although I would disagree with your logic.

One cannot divide 2 by a null set, because the statement itself makes no sense (hence is "undefined"). But dividing nothing yields nothing, always. The number of parts requested is irrelevant. Thus;
0/2 = 0, just as standard analysis proposes.

alan1000 wrote:(In fact you might like to argue, just to be mischievous, that to be divisible by 2, the null set would have to contain three subsets - can you guess why?)

I am curious of your reasoning. 8)
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25609
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby unlz » Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:02 am

it is indeed possible to divide with zero, to do so you must lose the math mindset and think of zero as a starting point.
unlz
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:54 am

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby James S Saint » Mon Feb 06, 2017 7:52 pm

unlz wrote:it is indeed possible to divide with zero, to do so you must lose the math mindset and think of zero as a starting point.

How can you divide two apples into a "starting point"?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25609
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Xunzian » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:33 am

Infinity and undefined start being really important when you hit calculus. But it's not just that. Programming is hot. Trying to argue that X/0 is anything other than "undefined" will upend any programming language.

Absent theory where I'm not an expert (though I could talk to some), what practical gains would be made by a not-undefined answer?
User avatar
Xunzian
Drunken Master
 
Posts: 10437
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:14 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby James S Saint » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:32 am

Xunzian wrote:Absent theory where I'm not an expert (though I could talk to some), what practical gains would be made by a not-undefined answer?

Not having to handle all of those exceptions, would be nice. 8)
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25609
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Xunzian » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:43 am

So you admit to reifying math.

That's an easy mistake to make. Especially if you only know enough to be dangerous.

But breaking a tool to make it useless to those that use it but approachable to those who don't seems like a really ass-backwards approach.
User avatar
Xunzian
Drunken Master
 
Posts: 10437
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:14 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby James S Saint » Sun Feb 12, 2017 9:57 am

Xunzian wrote:So you admit to reifying math.

That's an easy mistake to make. Especially if you only know enough to be dangerous.

But breaking a tool to make it useless to those that use it but approachable to those who don't seems like a really ass-backwards approach.

I'm not one of those trying to, nor wanting to, change it. I am the one trying to explain the sense in the original intent.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25609
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby Xunzian » Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:09 am

Who cares about original intent?
User avatar
Xunzian
Drunken Master
 
Posts: 10437
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:14 pm

Re: Dividing by zero

Postby unlz » Sun Feb 19, 2017 3:33 am

math is not pear and apples. to get somewhere in these things you need to think outside of the box. starting point is a abstract term in lack of better words for it. zero is holy grail of mathemathics but i feel only coz of a designer error where everything is this and that and cannot be anything else. its not. my intuiton tells me that zero is something you can see. like the thing that makes black holes or something like that..im tellin u, my intuition i rarely wrong.
unlz
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:54 am

Previous

Return to Science, Technology, and Math



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users