This is a true breakthough if it really works, but there are a lot of mathematicians who are calling “bullshit” on this one. Anybody out there want to try and prove/disprove this guy?
Computers simply cannot divide by zero. Try it on your calculator and you’ll get an error message.
The theory of nullity is set to make all kinds of sums possible that, previously, scientists and computers couldn’t work around.
“We’ve just solved a problem that hasn’t been solved for twelve hundred years – and it’s that easy,” proclaims Dr Anderson having demonstrated his solution on a whiteboard at Highdown School, in Emmer Green.
The biggest problem is that the concept of “nullity” isn’t like the “imaginary” number i (the square of -1), which actually exists and is vital to engineering, especially in power transmission. Even if you have a symbol for the concept, that doesn’t mean you can continue to calculate.
This problem was solve in the 1960s by Abraham Robinson, a Mathematician and Logician.
Using mathematical logic, he proved that you could extend Calculus to included “infinities” and “infinitesimals”. He called it .
Basically, he defined a set of numbers called Hyper-Real numbers, that included all Real numbers + infinities + infinitesimals. Any true statement using Hyper-Real numbers is also true using Real numbers, so long as the infinities and infinitesimals cancelled each other out in the final answer.
So, instead of dividing by zero, you divide by an infinitesimal number. You do all of your equation manipulation this way, and as long as the final answer isn’t infinite or infinitesimal, everything is fine.
It’s a shame more people don’t know about this. Much of basic Calculus was originally invented using reasoning similar to Robinson’s. His work just legitimized those approaches, making them valid proofs.
Edgar
This problem was solve in the 1960s by Abraham Robinson, a Mathematician and Logician.
Using mathematical logic, he proved that you could extend Calculus to included “infinities” and “infinitesimals”. He called it Non-Standard Analysis.
Basically, he defined a set of numbers called Hyper-Real numbers, that included all Real numbers + infinities + infinitesimals. Any true statement using Hyper-Real numbers is also true using Real numbers, so long as the infinities and infinitesimals cancelled each other out in the final answer.
So, instead of dividing by zero, you divide by an infinitesimal number. You do all of your equation manipulation this way, and as long as the final answer isn’t infinite or infinitesimal, everything is fine.
It’s a shame more people don’t know about this. Much of basic Calculus was originally invented using reasoning similar to Robinson’s. His work just legitimized those approaches, making them valid proofs.
Edgar
Not to nitpick, but as the denominator approaches zero, the result can be either plus or minus infinity — direction matters. Also, there is nothing wrong with a mathematician defining x/0 as nullity, so long as he doesn’t claim it to be part of the real number system or any other number system that currently exists.
If you move over into complex numbers, by definition 0/0 = 1. (Or is it zero? My memory isn’t what it use to be and my text book is at work.)
x/0 is undefined. You can’t divide by zero. The Hyper-Real number system abides by this rule too.
Math is all about proving one thing from another thing, using a simple set of rules. If you break a rule, everything breaks down, and your answer is meaningless.
The trick is to figure out how to do what you want but still keep it within a logical framework that is consistent with itself. If you can’t do that, you don’t know what you’re doing.
so, infinite divided by zero just explodes. The only thing to know is the direction of the explosion
There is more than one infinity. Aleph null, aleph-1, etc.
I’m probably wrong but I suspect that “infinity/0” (unless you insist that it’s undefined which is ok with me) is something like aleph-1.