- #1
heshbon
- 27
- 0
Division by zero is undefined...but why doesn't somebody just define it?
Like they did with root (-1).
Like they did with root (-1).
heshbon said:Division by zero is undefined...but why doesn't somebody just define it?
Like they did with root (-1).
heshbon said:Division by zero is undefined...but why doesn't somebody just define it?
Like they did with root (-1).
heshbon said:Division by zero is undefined...but why doesn't somebody just define it?
Like they did with root (-1).
This definition is too restrictive, just say that y and it's inverse under the operation gives the identity.Tac-Tics said:What does that mean? Two operators are inverses if they "undo" each other, regardless of input. Addition and subtraction are the best known example. For any x and y, x + y - y = x. You start with x, you do "+y" then you "undo" the +y with a -y.
Does that mean addition is one-to-one? What is the definition of a one-to-one here?The proof of this lies in the fact that multiplication is not one-to-one (it does not map unique inputs to unique outputs). Functions which are one-to-one all have inverse functions. Functions which are not one-to-one may only, at best, have partial inverses.
wsalem said:This definition is too restrictive,
Let me clarify that when I said "y and it's inverse under the operation gives the identity.", I was implicitly assuming "if it exists" both for the inverse and for the identity. Obviously an operation doesn't need to have any of these!You shouldn't really speak of an operator's inverse. You speak about sections of that operator, where only one argument is applied, such as (*2), the doubling function. The inverse function would be (/2), the halving function.
Absolutely! I never argued that!The argument is that the section (*0), which maps all real numbers to 0, has no inverse.
I'm sorry but I can't follow, what "all functions (+n)" are you talking about here, do you mean to define a function for each n, why not just a single function that sends each element to it's inverse?When speaking about addition, what I meant was that all functions (+n) have an inverse called (-n). To contrast, for all n EXCEPT 0, (*n) has an inverse (/n). That exception cannot be removed because (*0) is not one-to-one. In fact, it is quite the opposite.
Surely the exception cannot be removed, but then if we define such function, actually *0 wouldn't be "not one-to-one" but rather undefined!To contrast, for all n EXCEPT 0, (*n) has an inverse (/n). That exception cannot be removed because (*0) is not one-to-one.
wsalem said:Tac-Tics, I should have assumed the definition meant to be informal, so I hope my reply didn't offend you.
In the scientific community, there is no such thing as a "stupid" question. All inquiries and curiosity are welcomed and encouraged, as they contribute to the advancement of knowledge and understanding.
This phrase is often used to acknowledge that the question may seem obvious or simple to some, but the person asking genuinely does not know the answer and is seeking clarification.
It is always better to ask a question, even if it may seem "stupid" to some. Asking questions is a crucial part of the scientific process and can lead to new insights and discoveries.
Remember that everyone has different levels of knowledge and understanding in different areas. Asking questions is a sign of curiosity and a desire to learn, which are important qualities in a scientist. It is also important to create a safe and inclusive environment where all questions are welcomed and respected.
It is always a good idea to do some research and fact-check before asking a question, as it may save time and lead to a more productive discussion. However, if you are unsure or cannot find the answer, do not hesitate to ask the question as it may spark a valuable conversation and lead to new knowledge.