# Why does 13 divided by 0 not equal infinity?Watch

Announcements
This discussion is closed.
5 years ago
#61
(Original post by Elcano)
So it's not 'completely wrong'.
Are you studying maths at university? If you are, you really should realise that this is​ completely wrong...
0
5 years ago
#62
(Original post by Felix Felicis)
Are you studying maths at university? If you are, you really should realise that this is​ completely wrong...
No, I'm not. And no, it is not completely wrong. There's a plus missing. That's it.
0
5 years ago
#63
(Original post by Elcano)
Nope, YOU'RE the one who keeps quoting me.

Yep, I forgot it. As I said before. Still want to go on and on about it?
You said that the limit was infinity, I quoted you saying it wasn't to avoid any confusion that it may cause. You then quoted me back saying that wolfram alpha agrred with you. I pointed out that this was not true then you replied back asking me if I could read.
0
5 years ago
#64
(Original post by tazmaniac97)
Why does 13 divided by 0 not equal infinity? I really don't understand why?
My Maths teacher who has a PhD. in Mathematics told us. So basically I told my friend in another class, and she said it doesn't. So we both decided to have a bet on here on which one of us is right.
There is some ambiguity about division by zero and infinity. The reason it's undefined is because it's both infinity and n.

I have a pie, I divide the pie 0 times, how many pies do I have? I have 1 pie.

I have 1 pie, how many times can I take 0 slices? Infinitely many times.
0
5 years ago
#65
(Original post by Elcano)
No, I'm not. And no, it is not completely wrong. There's a plus missing. That's it.
It is completely wrong. It's like saying that 1+1=8 is almost right because you just need a little line above one of the 1's to make it a 7. As I said, taht plus is very important and completely changes the meaning of the equation. But even with the +, it is still possible to have 1/f(x) not existing when x->0+, where f(0)=0.
0
5 years ago
#66
(Original post by james22)
You said that the limit was infinity, I quoted you saying it wasn't to avoid any confusion that it may cause. You then quoted me back saying that wolfram alpha agrred with you. I pointed out that this was not true then you replied back asking me if I could read.
I quoted you saying wolfram alpha agreed with me, quoting what it said, which clearly were one-sided limits. Which means I already corrected my mistake of forgetting the plus, I didn't know you would start a murder investigation because of that.
0
5 years ago
#67
(Original post by james22)
It is completely wrong. It's like saying that 1+1=8 is almost right because you just need a little line above one of the 1's to make it a 7.
No, it is not.

(Original post by james22)
But even with the +, it is still possible to have 1/f(x) not existing when x->0+, where f(0)=0.
What do you mean exactly? 13/x does contain a f(x) where f(0)=0, and yet lim(x->0+)=+inf.... and I'm not talking about any f(x), I'm talking about the specific example mentioned in the thread title.
0
5 years ago
#68
(Original post by Elcano)
I quoted you saying wolfram alpha agreed with me, quoting what it said, which clearly were one-sided limits. Which means I already corrected my mistake of forgetting the plus, I didn't know you would start a murder investigation because of that.

(Original post by Elcano)
No, it is not.

What do you mean exactly? 13/x does contain a f(x) where f(0)=0, and yet lim(x->0+)=+inf.... and I'm not talking about any f(x), I'm talking about the specific example mentioned in the thread title.
I'll reply to these later, at a better hour.
0
5 years ago
#69
(Original post by Elcano)
I quoted you saying wolfram alpha agreed with me, quoting what it said, which clearly were one-sided limits. Which means I already corrected my mistake of forgetting the plus, I didn't know you would start a murder investigation because of that.
Wolfram alpha didn't agree with you. It agreed with me.

(Original post by Elcano)
No, it is not.

What do you mean exactly? 13/x does contain a f(x) where f(0)=0, and yet lim(x->0+)=+inf.... and I'm not talking about any f(x), I'm talking about the specific example mentioned in the thread title.
The OP didn't specify 13/x as x->0, he said 13/0. You could equally treat tht as meaning 13/f(x) where f(x)->0 as x->0.
0
5 years ago
#70
(Original post by Elcano)
...
Why are you incapable of saying

"I was wrong"
0
5 years ago
#71
Oh dear. Another case of mathematical idiots trying to teach mathematicians their own subject.
0
5 years ago
#72
As a uni student studying Economics, I have actually played with infinities for more than I can remember. And we always interpreted 1 / infinity as zero when doing integrals. The same with e^infinity.

Is this wrong? Is it really wrong to say 1 / infinity = 0?
0
5 years ago
#73
Arguing over a maths question. Laughably pathetic.
0
5 years ago
#74
(Original post by SecretDuck)
As a uni student studying Economics, I have actually played with infinities for more than I can remember. And we always interpreted 1 / infinity as zero when doing integrals. The same with e^infinity.

Is this wrong?
Is it really wrong to say 1 / infinity = 0?
Not in the context of your work, no

There is a difference between Maths and the need to use maths in the real world
0
5 years ago
#75
(Original post by TenOfThem)
Not in the context of your work, no

There is a difference between Maths and the need to use maths in the real world
Thank you

We use infinities mainly in probability distributions and we always have to think about 1 / infinity as a limiting case.
0
5 years ago
#76
(Original post by ninuzu)
There's SO many YouTube videos on dividing by zero... Numberphile actually found that it could actually equal anything you like, and they came up with a proof to show it.
do you mean 0/0 can be anything?
0
5 years ago
#77
(Original post by SecretDuck)

Is this wrong? Is it really wrong to say 1 / infinity = 0?
No, because Adam Smith never had to calculate how many minus pins, an irrational number of workers could make in an imaginary number of days.
3
5 years ago
#78
Because infinity is a concept and not a number.
0
5 years ago
#79
(Original post by nulli tertius)
No, because Adam Smith never had to calculate how many minus pins, an irrational number of workers could make in an imaginary number of days.
prsom
0
5 years ago
#80
(Original post by ChildishHambino)
do you mean 0/0 can be anything?
No.
I think this is the video:
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

### Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

### See more of what you like onThe Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

### University open days

• London Metropolitan University
Tue, 21 May '19
• Brunel University London
Wed, 22 May '19
• University of Roehampton
Wed, 22 May '19

### Poll

Join the discussion

#### How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (201)
22.04%
The paper was reasonable (388)
42.54%
Not feeling great about that exam... (175)
19.19%
It was TERRIBLE (148)
16.23%