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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Square1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Components
Click For Summary
In evaluating fractions, 0/x (where x > 0) equals 0, while x/0 is undefined due to the impossibility of dividing by zero. The expression 0/0 is classified as an indeterminate form, particularly relevant in limits, as it can yield various outcomes depending on the context. There is no specific algebraic rule mandating the evaluation of denominators first; rather, the fundamental principle is that division by zero is not permitted. The discussion emphasizes the need for clarity in understanding these concepts, especially in calculus and algebra. Understanding these rules is essential for accurate mathematical reasoning.
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
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K