X / 0 = holding any major development up?

  • Thread starter JSK333
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Major
I'm curious if there are major equations, theories, or the like, being held up by running into division by 0.In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of division by zero and the limitations it presents in mathematical systems. There is a suggestion to use a variable for 1/0 to continue solving equations, but it is noted that this breaks the structure of a field. Other mathematical structures, such as hyperreal and surreal numbers, are mentioned as alternatives. The conversation ends with a discussion about the goals and applications of dividing by zero in mathematics.
  • #1
JSK333
I'm curious if there are major equations, theories, or the like, being held up by running into division by 0.

I once had a thought about a way to get around this problem, and wanted to try applying it to an existing problem.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Anything divided by zero is undefined. There is no room to consider any alternatives.

- Warren
 
  • #3
So I guess that's a "no"?

In HS I tried using a variable for 1/0 to see how it would affect equations that ended with division by zero; to see if they could proceed further and anything meaninful resulted.

It was a bit interesting, but I had nothing substantial to try it with.

What do you guys think about this idea? Say, [0] = 1/0 for example? And then when you get division by zero, use the variable [0] and continue solving until you reach an answer?

Solomon
 
  • #4
Division by zero is dead on arrival for any math system with the structure of a field. That is because x * 0 = 0 for any x in the field. Also, 0 unequal 1. So, x * 0 can't be 1.

But it isn't all lost. You can give up the field structure, but that carries its own troubles. More interestingly, it is possible to use something just about as good as 0 for scientific work. Check out these links.

link to hyperreal numbers --->
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperreal_number

link to surreal numbers --->
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surreal_number

link to mathematical structure of a field --->
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field

That stuff is still under research.

[corrected for my error in explanation: I treated the supposed field as if it had an order, <, which might not necessarily be the case. So, the right expression is '0 unequal 1' rather than the original '0 < 1'. quart]
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Originally posted by quartodeciman
Division by zero is dead on arrival for any math system with the structure of a field. That is because x * 0 = 0 for any x in the field. Also, 0 unequal 1. So, x * 0 can't be 1.


I'm sorry but I didn't see anything in the definition of a field that required x*0=0 for all x in the field. Did I miss something?
 
  • #6
x * 0 = x * 0 + 0
= x * 0 + (x + (-x))
= (x * 0 + x) + (-x)
= (x * 0 + x * 1) + (-x)
= x * (0 + 1) + (-x)
= x * 1 + (-x)
= x + (-x)
= 0
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Right! It's a theorem.
 
  • #8
Ok, I can see how that follows from the definition. I take it that the hyperreals and surreals substitute division by infinitessimals. What precisely do you give up by not having a field so long as you ensure that (x/0)*0 =x? I'm guessing you're about to tell me that it depends on exactly how you give up having a field. But any clues or pointers to good reading would be appreciated. I'm working on some stuff in this area but coming at it from set theory and logic rather than analysis.
 
  • #9
Let's see now.

From the above demonstration:

0 is a normal additive identity
x has an additive inverse, -x
1 is a multiplicative identity for x
x, 0, -x reassociate
x factors (undistributes) from 0,1

One of these has to break to avoid x * 0 = 0.

I suppose you want more than just the system {0} with 0+0=0, 0-0=0,0*0=0,0/0=0.

Maybe there is something in math subjects like rings and modules (instead of fields and vector spaces).

Most important: where are you headed with this? What is the goal? Why divide by zero?
 
  • #10
My reason is purely curiousity.

I remember in match class in HS, we would solve problems then ended with division by 0, and of course, that's where you stopped with an answer of "undefined."

So I am curious what happens if you say, ok, let's say 1 / 0 is not undefined, and assign that value to a variable, then continue solving...

So, if you ended up with (4x - 3) / 0 you would say you had (4x - 3)[0] and then continue solving for x, for example.

Solomon
 
  • #11
More interesting it would be to know why you might be dividing by something that runs the risk of going to 0. That might indicate something about the starting problem.

1. a mistake was made at an earlier step
2. a function behaves like it might blow up at some point
 
  • #12
Well I'm not primarily interested in division by zero, it's only come up secondarily. I've been working on an extension of some work of De Bois-Reymond regarding ordering functions that have infinite limits based on rate of growth. As part of that I've been looking at asymptotic functions and also functions that approach zero. n/x as x -> 0 comes up in this regard.

I need to take a closer look at the hyperreals and surreals to see how they compare with what I'm looking at.

So do I have a look at Robinson? Or is there somewhere else I should go first?
 
  • #13
here are two more links:

Phil Apps on nonstandard analysis

http://www.haverford.edu/math/wdavidon/NonStd.html [Broken]

here is the main book I actually own:

Martin Davis, Applied Nonstandard Analysis, Wiley-Interscience(1977)

I don't know your subject and so I don't know what will help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
Thanks.

I started off trying to develop an alternative way of comparing the size of infinite collections that would behave more intuitively than cardinality in certain cases. I've got the basics of that worked out thanks to some earlier work by Du Bois-Reymond and Pincherle. But I've still got to connect everything up to notions of infinity coming from analysis to make sure I'm not just re-inventing the wheel. I'll tell you what, I'll post a thread with an example problem and see what folks have to say about it.

Link to thread
 
Last edited:

What is the meaning of "X / 0 = holding any major development up"?

This statement is an expression of a mathematical operation, where X represents any variable and 0 represents zero. It suggests that dividing any number by zero will result in a major development being delayed or prevented.

Why is division by zero not allowed in mathematics?

Division by zero is not allowed in mathematics because it leads to undefined or infinite values. In other words, it violates the fundamental properties of arithmetic and makes it impossible to perform accurate calculations.

Can division by zero ever have a defined value?

No, division by zero can never have a defined value. This is because any number divided by zero will result in an infinite or undefined value, which is not a valid mathematical answer.

What are the consequences of dividing by zero in scientific calculations?

The consequences of dividing by zero in scientific calculations can be severe. It can lead to incorrect results, which can have a significant impact on research and experiments. It can also cause errors in computer programs and simulations.

Are there any situations where division by zero is allowed in science?

No, division by zero is not allowed in any scientific context. It is considered an illegal operation and should be avoided at all costs to ensure the accuracy and validity of scientific findings.

Similar threads

  • General Math
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
3K
Back
Top