Order of evaluating an a fraction's components - 0/0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Square1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Components
Square1
Messages
143
Reaction score
1
Just wondering if I've forgotten a rule here, or there is some new terminology I can learn.

We know 0/x when x > 0, is equal to 0. x/0 is undefined..since we "blow up" dividing any value by a value that is more than infinitely small...by zero.

We say that 0/0 is also undefined. We choose to consider the denominator 0 here first to say, "dividing by zero...can't be defined", instead of first considering the numerator and saying maybe, "zero is going to be divided. It's going to be equal to zero no matter what since we started with nothing".

Question: Is there an algebraic rule, or convention, that generally states you should start to evaluate the denominators first? Or is x/0 simply its own case where we can begin and end evaluating the parts that make up an expression?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Square1 said:
Just wondering if I've forgotten a rule here, or there is some new terminology I can learn.

We know 0/x when x > 0, is equal to 0. x/0 is undefined..since we "blow up" dividing any value by a value that is more than infinitely small...by zero.
The basic rule is that division by 0 is not allowed.
Square1 said:
We say that 0/0 is also undefined.
0/0 is called an indeterminate form. It shows up in limits where both the numerator and denominator are approaching zero. This is indeterminate, because some quotients with this form actually have a limit, which can be literally any number or even ##\infty## or ##-\infty##.
Square1 said:
We choose to consider the denominator 0 here first to say, "dividing by zero...can't be defined", instead of first considering the numerator and saying maybe, "zero is going to be divided. It's going to be equal to zero no matter what since we started with nothing".

Question: Is there an algebraic rule, or convention, that generally states you should start to evaluate the denominators first?
No. The rule is that division by zero is not allowed.
Square1 said:
Or is x/0 simply its own case where we can begin and end evaluating the parts that make up an expression?
 
  • Like
Likes Ssnow
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top