0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Because anything multiplied by 0 equals 0

Note: The fake juju knows nothing about math. Division by zero is not a defined operation because doing so can cause incorrect results. Take for examplex(x-x)=x^2-x^2. Factor the right side and divide both sides by x-x and you have x(x-x)/(x-x)=(x+x)(x-x)/(x-x) Then canceling results in x=x+x which is x=2x. Finally, divide both sides by x and you have 1=2! The only mistake made was dividing by x-x which is zero, i.e., I divided by zero which caused the disastrous result of 1=2!

Guys, please no "divide by zero" funny pictures on this topic.

Abstract algebraAny number system that forms a commutative ring — for instance, the integers, the real numbers, and the complex numbers — can be extended to a wheel in which division by zero is always possible; however, in such a case, "division" has a slightly different meaning.The concepts applied to standard arithmetic are similar to those in more general algebraic structures, such as rings and fields. In a field, every nonzero element is invertible under multiplication; as above, division poses problems only when attempting to divide by zero. This is likewise true in a skew field (which for this reason is called a division ring). However, in other rings, division by nonzero elements may also pose problems. For example, the ring Z/6Z of integers mod 6. The meaning of the expression should be the solution x of the equation 2x = 2. But in the ring Z/6Z, 2 is not invertible under multiplication. This equation has two distinct solutions, x = 1 and x = 4, so the expression is undefined.In field theory, the expression is only shorthand for the formal expression ab−1, where b−1 is the multiplicative inverse of b. Since the field axioms only guarantee the existence of such inverses for nonzero elements, this expression has no meaning when b is zero. Modern texts include the axiom 0 ≠ 1 to avoid having to consider the trivial ring or a "field with one element", where the multiplicative identity coincides with the additive identity.

To show how division by zero does not work with the rules or mathematics we can use the associative law of multiplication and the fact that 0x2=0We can use the rules of arithmetic to show 0x2=0 as follows:given 2 is defined as 1+1=2 thenM1 tells us that 0x2=2x0D tells us that (1+1) x0 = 1x0 + 1x0But M3 tells us that 1x0=0so this equals 0+0finally A3 implies 0+0=0Now having proved 0x2=0 we can use this with M2 to give1 = inf x 0 = inf x (0x2) = (inf x 0) x 2 = 1 x 2 = 2Since 1 does not equal 2 then an inconsistency with the most basic rules of numbers and as such division by zero does not work with these rules.M1: The commutative law of multiplication states:ab=bafor any two numbers a and bM2: The associative law of multiplication states:a(bc) = (ab)cfor any 3 numbers a, b and cM3: The multiplicative identity:1a = afor any number a The distributive law states:(a+b)c = ac + bcfor any three numbers a, b and cA3: The additive identity:0+a=afor any number a