On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:47:13 +0200, Roman Reiner <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:

> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> On 20/09/2011 02:06 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> > On 9/19/2011 11:20, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> >> Fact is, 0 * infinity = 0, so it's not a sensible answer.
>> >
>> > I can't imagine how you can say dividing by zero is undefined, but  
>> then
>> > go and define multiplying zero by infinity. :-)
>>
>> If you multiply *anything* by zero, the result is always zero. This
>> isn't exactly news. We're not "defining" anything, we're just using the
>> pre-existing definition of how multiplication by zero works.
>
> You're wrong there. 0 * inf = 0 is indeed a definition as the result of  
> the
> left-hand side is undefined in the same manner as dividing by zero is  
> (actually,
> the concepts of multiplication and division are mathematically the very  
> same
> thing).
> see, if you define 1/0 = inf, and treat 0 and inf as ordinary numbers,  
> then 0 *
> inf = 0/0 = 1 contrary to your claim. This contradiction is the result  
> of using
> inf as a number when, in fact, it isn't.
>
> Regards Roman
>
>

So there needs to be a rule of order - similar to doing calculations in  
brackets first.
What I mean is in th case of 0/0 - which rule should be applied first?
A) 0/anything =0
B) anything divided by itself =1
C) anything divided by 0 is undefined



-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message