Answering Questions About ∞: Arithmetic Operators, Results & More

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jacket
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of infinity (∞) and its interaction with arithmetic operators. Participants explore questions related to the nature of infinity, its representation in mathematics, and the results of various arithmetic expressions involving infinity. The scope includes theoretical considerations, mathematical reasoning, and conceptual clarifications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that infinity is not a real number but represents a value greater than any real number.
  • Others argue that infinity might be considered a number in different mathematical contexts or systems.
  • One participant emphasizes that the interpretation of expressions involving infinity should be framed in terms of limits.
  • Another participant points out the distinction between different meanings of infinity in set theory and analysis.
  • There are discussions about the validity of specific arithmetic expressions involving infinity, with some participants providing examples and conditions under which certain limits can be evaluated.
  • Humorous exchanges occur regarding the interpretation of infinity and its comparison to finite numbers, with references to the factorial notation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether infinity can be classified as a number and how arithmetic operations involving infinity should be interpreted. There is no consensus on these points, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some expressions involving infinity are contingent on the context of limits, and participants highlight the need for careful interpretation based on mathematical definitions and frameworks.

jacket
Messages
32
Reaction score
1
I know ∞ is not really a number. It represents 'greater than every real number'. And for any real number x, we can say
-∞ < x < +∞

Now, my questions are -
(A) how come arithmetic operators interact with ∞ if it is not a number?
(B) what are the results for the expressions below?
(C) and also why we do have results for these if ∞ is not a number?

01. (+∞) + (+∞) =
02. (-∞) + (-∞) =
03. (+∞) + (-∞) =
04. (+∞) - (+∞) =
05. (+∞) - (-∞) =
06. (-∞) - (-∞) =
07. (+∞) * (+∞) =
08. (-∞) * (+∞) =
09. (-∞) * (-∞) =
10. (+∞) / (+∞) =
11. (+∞) / (-∞) =
12. (-∞) / (+∞) =
13. (-∞) / (-∞) =
14. (+∞) + any real number > 0 =
15. (-∞) + any real number > 0 =
16. (+∞) - any real number < 0 =
17. (-∞) - any real number < 0 =
18. (+∞) * (any real number > 0) =
19. (+∞) * (any real number < 0) =
20. (-∞) * (any real number > 0) =
21. (-∞) * (any real number < 0) =
22. (+∞) * 0 =
23. (-∞) * 0 =
24. (+∞) / (any real number > 0) =
25. (+∞) / (any real number < 0) =
26. (-∞) / (any real number > 0) =
27. (-∞) / (any real number < 0) =
28. (+∞) / 0 =
29. (-∞) / 0 =
30. (+∞) ^ (any real positive number except 0, 1) =
31. (+∞) ^ (any real negative number except 0, -1) =
32. (-∞) ^ (any real positive number except 0, 1) =
33. (-∞) ^ (any real negative number except 0, -1) =
34. (+∞) ^ 0 =
35. (+∞) ^ 1 =
36. (+∞) ^ -1 =
37. (-∞) ^ 0 =
38. (-∞) ^ 1 =
39. (-∞) ^ -1 =
40. (+∞) ^ (+∞) =
41. (-∞) ^ (-∞) =
42. (+∞) ^ (-∞) =
43. (-∞) ^ (+∞) =
44. 1 / (+∞) =
45. 0 / (+∞) =
46. 1 / (-∞) =
47. 0 / (-∞) =
48. 0 / 0 =
49. 1 / 0 =
50. 0 / (+∞) =
51. 0 / (-∞) =
52. 1 ^ (+∞) =
53. 1 ^ (-∞) =
54. 0 ^ (+∞) =
55. 0 ^ (-∞) =

I know that is long. But I will very much appreciate your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Every expression in the list above should be interpreted as a shortened form of a problem involving limits. For example, #1 stands for $$ \lim_{x, \ y \ \to +\infty} (x + y) = +\infty $$ This can be proved rather trivially. ## x \to \infty ## means that for any given ## X > 0 ## there is ## x > X ##; same for ## y ##. Thus, if given any ## Z > 0 ##, let ## X = Y = Z/2 ##, then there are ## x > X = Z/2 ## and ## y > Y = Z/2 ##, so ## x + y > Z ##, which means ##(x + y) \to \infty##.

#22 is trickier. It can mean two things: $$ \lim_{x \to +\infty} x \cdot 0 $$ and $$ \lim_{x \to +\infty, \ y \to 0 } x \cdot y $$ The first of these is zero. The second cannot be resolved unless some relationship between ## x ## and ## y ## is known. For example, if ## y = x^{-1} ##, then, obviously, the limit is 1. If ## y = x^{-2} ##, then the limit is zero. If ## y = x^{-1/2} ##, the limit is ##+\infty##. If ## y = -x^{-1/2} ##, the limit is ##-\infty##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
1. "I know ∞ is not really a number"
----------------
Incorrect.
Infinity is not a real number, but might perfectly well be a number in another number system than the reals.
 
goldust said:
Infinity represents a value as big as you want it to be.[/url]

Am I allowed to prefer it to be equal to 5?
 
goldust said:
Infinity represents a value as big as you want it to be. That's the way I think of it. However, infinity cannot be a number because of Aleph numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

You're equivocating here. The "infinity" referred to in set theory (i.e. the cardinal numbers) is not the same as the "infinity" referred to in analysis in the context of limits, or the extended real line. The word has many different meanings in different disciplines.
 
arildno said:
Am I allowed to prefer it to be equal to 5?
Of course- for sufficiently large values of 5!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
HallsofIvy said:
Of course- for sufficiently large values of 5!
:biggrin:
 
HallsofIvy said:
Of course- for sufficiently large values of 5!
Why bring 120 into this?
 
  • #10
HallsofIvy said:
Of course- for sufficiently large values of 5!

oay said:
Why bring 120 into this?
The exclamation point is punctuation, not factorial. HoI is being facetious...
 
  • #11
Mark44 said:
The exclamation point is punctuation, not factorial. HoI is being facetious...
You don't say... :rolleyes:
 
  • #12
I couldn't tell whether you were asking seriously or were attempting to be humorous...
 
  • #13
Mark44 said:
I couldn't tell whether you were asking seriously or were attempting to be humorous...
If you seriously thought I was talking about 5! being 120 then I think you have to check your funny bone.

I'm not saying any of the recent posts were particularly funny, but I was just adding to the "comedy" which HoI started. o:)
 
  • #14
People on this forum write all sorts of stuff that seems ridiculous, but that they seriously mean. Since you gave no indication that you were asking with tongue firmly placed in cheek, how was I to know? In your later posts you included the smiley faces, so I could tell your intention.
 
  • #15
Mark44 said:
People on this forum write all sorts of stuff that seems ridiculous, but that they seriously mean. Since you gave no indication that you were asking with tongue firmly placed in cheek, how was I to know? In your later posts you included the smiley faces, so I could tell your intention.
arildno obviously was on the same lines as me. ie we both knew HoI was having a joke.

Nothing more to be said really.
 
  • #16
oay said:
arildno obviously was on the same lines as me. ie we both knew HoI was having a joke.
It's not about whether HoI was being facetious - that was clear to me as well. What I'm saying is that it wasn't clear to me whether you got that joke.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
912
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K