Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

[TheRapingDragon]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

Not going to even attempt to get into this whole debate, far too above me for math, but wanted to address one point.

1 always = 1
if you have 1 apple and i give you another apple, you will have 2 apples
didnt we learn this in grade 1

Is every single apple the same weight, the same density, the same amount of juice, is every single apple in this world identical. No. If the answer was yes then 1 = 1, but looking at apples (or any other item) you could easily say that apple 1 is 0.999812% different from apple 2, thus 1 would = less than one. So 1 /= 1.

In that way it is possible to define that 1 does not always equal 1, and so this debate is possible.

You can even bring this theory up to 1 + 1 = 2.

If apple one is 99.112% of apple two, then you are really doing 1 + 0.99112 which doesn't equal 2. So many possibilities.

[fastfingers65]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

..........

[darkdieuguerre]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

Not going to even attempt to get into this whole debate, far too above me for math, but wanted to address one point.



Is every single apple the same weight, the same density, the same amount of juice, is every single apple in this world identical. No. If the answer was yes then 1 = 1, but looking at apples (or any other item) you could easily say that apple 1 is 0.999812% different from apple 2, thus 1 would = less than one. So 1 /= 1.

In that way it is possible to define that 1 does not always equal 1, and so this debate is possible.

You can even bring this theory up to 1 + 1 = 2.

If apple one is 99.112% of apple two, then you are really doing 1 + 0.99112 which doesn't equal 2. So many possibilities.

Now that's just irrelevant. An apple cannot be a percentage of something else because it is an object that exists in a certain state. If an apple is larger or smaller than another apple, that makes it an apple, and just an apple. An apple is an apple regardless of the size, type, etc. You can say that you have 98% of an apple by cutting 98% of an apple, but you can't say that a whole apple is 98% of another apple without using size, or some other quality.

1+1=2 is a postulate. It cannot be proven, so it is assumed to be true so our whole system of mathematics works.

[lord_carbo]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

1+1=2 is a postulate. It cannot be proven, so it is assumed to be true so our whole system of mathematics works.

It's not assumed to be true, it is.

do you even know what you are talking about?

Do you? All you said in response to my post was "do you even know what you are talking about?" as if you do... yet you never correct anything that I said! Man, that's stupid.

To save your time, I'll answer for you: You don't. Merely because you think 1 + 1 can equal anything other than 2.

Not going to even attempt to get into this whole debate, far too above me for math, but wanted to address one point.



Is every single apple the same weight, the same density, the same amount of juice, is every single apple in this world identical. No. If the answer was yes then 1 = 1, but looking at apples (or any other item) you could easily say that apple 1 is 0.999812% different from apple 2, thus 1 would = less than one. So 1 /= 1.

In that way it is possible to define that 1 does not always equal 1, and so this debate is possible.

You can even bring this theory up to 1 + 1 = 2.

If apple one is 99.112% of apple two, then you are really doing 1 + 0.99112 which doesn't equal 2. So many possibilities.

One apple represents the quantity of one. Stop being overly technical by saying all apples are different. Well, okay, they're all different, but an apple is still an apple, regardless of mass, size, etc.

[Reach]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

<Reach> Mmm, Godel
<Godel> Mmm, ReachIN FOR MA FUCEN HIDDEN RIFLE/WALKING STICK
<Godel> FUCEN EVIL PROFESSORS
<Godel> I AIN'T EATIN **** FUC NO
<Godel> brb dying of starvation
<Godel> lmfao get it
<Godel> GODEL'S FIRST COMPLETENESS THEOREM
<Godel> MY WORK HERE IS COMPLETE
<Godel> QED
* Godel has quit (broken pipe)

...XD

1+1=2 is a postulate. It cannot be proven, so it is assumed to be true so our whole system of mathematics works.

Using Godel numbering you do not really need to assume anything. I am well aware of the use of axioms and such as the foundation for...well, everything, but that is not really what I was talking about.

[moches]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

Anything multiplied by 0 is 0.

Therefore, Infinity*Zero is 0.

[RandomPscho]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

Zero * Infinity is an undefined operation.

[Reach]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

moches reads threads.

[archbishopjabber]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

http://www.math.oregonstate.edu/home/programs/undergrad/CalculusQuestStudyGuides/SandS/lHopital/inf_times_zero.html

That should answer your question.

[moches]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

Wait. Is "moches reads threads" a good thing or a bad thing.

[RandomPscho]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

It is complete sarcasm.

[perkeyone]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

i think in order to solve some undefined cases, certain rules should have dominance over others (ex. rule 1 (x*0=0) > rule 2 (x*inf=inf) therefor (inf*0=0) just as example)
using a "rule dominance" i think the undefined solutions would be the following

inf^0=1
0^0=1
1^inf=1
0^inf=0
inf^-1=0' (0' does not equal 0)
inf/inf=1
0/0=1
inf*0=0
(x>1)^inf=inf
(x<1)^inf=0'

ill add more as i think of things
THESE ARE NOT TRUE THESE ARE JUST SUGGESTIONS

[perkeyone]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

sorry double post

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

THESE ARE NOT TRUE THESE ARE JUST SUGGESTIONS

Terrible, misleading, counterproductive suggestions.

Math doesn't work like that. It can't work like that.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[RandomPscho]

Re: Infinity * Zero = Any Number ARGUE HERE

It is called precedence, not "rule of dominance."

Guido is correct...