MHB Why is dividing by zero impossible in math?

mathdad
Messages
1,280
Reaction score
0
We know division by zero is not possible but what is the math reason why it is impossible to divide by zero?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Let's say you wanted to do 5/0, then you're asking "how many 0's are there in 5?"

Well, try adding up 0's until you get to 5...

Hang on, 0 + 0 = 0... If I keep adding 0 we still stay at 0...

How can we ever possibly get to 5?
 
Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.

In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.
 
Great information.

- - - Updated - - -

Say there are 5 people in a particular classroom. They came to class without a pencil. If the principal walks into the classroom and tells me to distribute one pencil per student but I have no pencils, no one will get a pencil. How can I divide a number by nothing? So, number ÷ nothing = undefined.
 
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...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.

Similar threads

Replies
47
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
40
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Back
Top