Why is Division by Zero Not Possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Giulio B.
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Doubt Elementary
Giulio B.
i'm a hight school student and this is a stupid question:

why "3 x 0 = 0" and "3/0 = nothing"? should make 0 too.

it bothers me from years
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"3/0" is not 'nothing', it is left 'undefined'. Why should it be zero?
 
division by zero is undefined.

Division is defined as multiplying by the inverse. Say you write a/b = x, you actually mean a * b^(-1) = x, where b^(-1) is defined the be the unique number such that b * b^(-1) = 1 = b^(-1) * b.

However, 0^(-1) does not exist: suppose it did. Then, 0 * 0^(-1) = 1. But for any a, 0 * a = 0. Hence, we have an obvious contradiction.

Thus, saying a/0 = a * 0^(-1) = x is completely meaningless, since 0^(-1) does not exist.
 
you can't divide 3 staws into zero groups.
You could divide them into 1 group of 3, or 3 groups of 1, or others if you cut the straws into smaller pieces. No mater how small the pieces there will just be more and more groups.
 
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
31
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
5K
Replies
44
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top