I don't really understand why it hasn't been numerically added into modern math. I mean, we make all kinds of properties for zero, but we can't make properties for infinity? It gets messy from time to time, but we could define everything strictly so that it still works algebraically.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Example: (quoted from http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.divideby0.html)

5/0 = [tex]\infty[/tex]

5 = 0*[tex]\infty[/tex]

Multiplicative property of 0.

5=0

WRONG!

If we defined [tex]\infty[/tex] numerically:

5/0 = 1/0

5 = 0/0

We then, could define 0/0 as truly undefined, or all real numbers, or some other name. I don't think we need to classify something as undefined, or anything for that matter, unless it is 0/0, 0^0, [tex]\infty^\infty[/tex] etc.

As for infinity, it should be implemented carefully into our modern math.

Now it's time for you to post "Reasons why infinity hasn't been implemented into modern math."

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Reasons why infinity hasn't been implemented into modern math

Loading...

Similar Threads for Reasons infinity hasn't | Date |
---|---|

A reasonable analogy for understanding similar matrices? | Dec 12, 2015 |

Reason for just a 0 vector in a null space of a L.I matrix | Jun 1, 2015 |

How reasonable to assume a prime gap of at least 10 before a pair of Twin Primes? | Jan 30, 2012 |

Does this reasoning ever reach infinity? 0<1<2<3<4<5 | Jun 17, 2010 |

Correct reasoning about direct sums proof? | Sep 18, 2007 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**