|
|
Post by 王泥喜 on Dec 7, 2006 20:33:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Keith T. Hemari on Dec 7, 2006 20:43:16 GMT -5
Somehow... this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I haven't checked out the accompanying videos yet, so maybe they explain more, but a little more description of the actual theory of 'nullity' would be helpful. I mean, if school children can understand it, it can be that complicated.
I did, however, find this quote to be highly entertaining: The theory of nullity is set to make all kinds of sums possible that, previously, scientists and computers couldn't work around.
I can just imagine the accountants of this world wetting themselves at the very thought XD
|
|
Oni Lukos
Behind The Logo Team 
Still spinning, for some reason...
Posts: 6,060
|
Post by Oni Lukos on Dec 7, 2006 20:47:51 GMT -5
Uhhh, no. Doesn't work that way. Sorry folks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Dec 7, 2006 21:18:52 GMT -5
I've heard it declared infinity in some circles (or negative infinity if a negative is divided by zero); to me that always made a sort of sense... anyway, did this professor come up with a big, detailed, multi-page proof? Because that's about the only way mathmeticians can really accept it as fact anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magi: Model 2007 on Dec 7, 2006 21:43:27 GMT -5
HEY GUYS THIS PROBLEM MAKES NO SENSE LET'S JUST MAKE UP A NUMBERS TO DO IT. Mathmeticians make no sense sometimes and just make up stuff  I'M LOOKING AT YOU IMAGINARY NUMBERS. |
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Dec 7, 2006 22:51:48 GMT -5
Mathmeticians make no sense sometimes and just make up stuff I'M LOOKING AT YOU IMAGINARY NUMBERS. Well, actually that's a very interesting example. At the very least, "i" represents that otherwise unattainable quantity of the square root of -1. About the only place I know it to be used is AC circuits (though I'm sure it has some other place in life); full AC circuit analysis would simply be impossible without imaginary numbers, so... maybe there is something to trying to quantify dividing by zero, but I'm not sure what. |
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 7, 2006 23:39:21 GMT -5
Maybe if it has practical purposes it'll be ... actually useful. Odds are: parlour trick.
As for computer purposes -- throw a damned exception. Egads, it's not hard to avoid a divide by zero error.
|
|
Matsrik
Behind The Logo Team
Gnome
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by Matsrik on Dec 7, 2006 23:53:32 GMT -5
Yeah, it's been done. It's called "Undefined".
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Dec 7, 2006 23:59:40 GMT -5
As for computer purposes -- throw a damned exception. Egads, it's not hard to avoid a divide by zero error. Also, careful programming with understanding of the device at hand would avoid divide by zero from ever happening in the first place. If a divide by zero creates a horrible condition of the pace maker, shame on the designers for allowing that condition to occur in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by CrazyMrLēo on Dec 8, 2006 0:58:13 GMT -5
A) Is this guy an idiot?
B) Why is this guy such an idiot?
|
|
Toxic
Behind The Logo Team
I am also Santa Claus.
Posts: 819
|
Post by Toxic on Dec 8, 2006 1:06:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Sz on Dec 8, 2006 1:15:20 GMT -5
As for computer purposes -- throw a damned exception. Egads, it's not hard to avoid a divide by zero error. Also, careful programming with understanding of the device at hand would avoid divide by zero from ever happening in the first place. If a divide by zero creates a horrible condition of the pace maker, shame on the designers for allowing that condition to occur in the first place. Exactly. It's not a big deal. The kids should be spending time trying to solve P ?= NP. Anyway, what do you want to bet their crazy invention functions the same as infinity. NEWSFLASH Edit: Also, XD at the downright ancient computer in that video, Toxic. |
|
|
|
Post by Kulock on Dec 8, 2006 5:28:07 GMT -5
"Behold! A new, mathematical solution for Divide by Zero! A special number!"
"OK..."
"It exists OUTSIDE of the number line!"
"So... what's the point of it being a number, if there's no way to attach it to the existing number line? Any equation involving it can't be completely solved to a real number. You're at the same dead end as before."
"But... the symbol is pretty..."
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert on Dec 8, 2006 11:04:17 GMT -5
That's a good point, too. At least imaginary numbers can be shown as a superset of real numbers (i.e. any real can be shown in complex form by r + 0i); a 2D coordinate plane can "map" the other numbers as compared to the real ones. This peculiar "nullility" thing has no place in the existing system, which makes it just another mark for a condition of which we cannot get a quantity nor can we continue to perform further calculations upon.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrazyMrLēo on Dec 8, 2006 12:37:41 GMT -5
"Hey Professor, what's Nullity plus one?"
".... :D" *kills self*
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrusi on Dec 8, 2006 14:37:54 GMT -5
We invented the goddamn empty set for a reason.
|
|
Sofox
Behind The Logo Team
Yeah, I'm still a jet propelled fox, deal with it
Posts: 1,273
|
Post by Sofox on Dec 8, 2006 15:50:18 GMT -5
|
|
Seph
Behind The Logo Team
Luigi and Marth for the win.
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by Seph on Dec 8, 2006 17:00:27 GMT -5
"Gentlemen, behold! A new, mathematical solution for Divide by Zero! A special number!" "OK..." "It exists OUTSIDE of the number line!" "So... what's the point of it being a number, if there's no way to attach it to the existing number line? Any equation involving it can't be completely solved to a real number. You're at the same dead end as before." "Two plus two is FOOOOOOOUR!" Fixed. |
|
I'M LOOKING AT YOU IMAGINARY NUMBERS.
