- #36
ferman
- 20
- 0
A.-
0/a = 0 is not mine. I put this because it is accepted in mathematics.
Really, and as I understand, this is acceptable in pure mathematics, but some debatable in mathematics of sets.
For example,
--if I have 3 empty sets 0+0+0 y can divide it by 3, getting 1 empty set 0.
--if I have 1 empty sets 0 y can divide it by 2, getting ½ of empty set.
But this question is very confuse to treat it now, and not important.
B.-
The only two question that I expose here are:
1.- a/a = 1 -- from equivalence principle.
2.- We can change dividend by quotient and obtain a NEW equality. So a/a = 1 give us a new equality when the change a/1= a. But this is a new equality where a doesn’t have to be equal to 1.
This property (I call commutive) and it is also given in subtraction.
Other question.-
Sorry for not use expressions as D(a,D(a,b))=b but I am same aged and don’t have accustomed to use them.
0/a = 0 is not mine. I put this because it is accepted in mathematics.
Really, and as I understand, this is acceptable in pure mathematics, but some debatable in mathematics of sets.
For example,
--if I have 3 empty sets 0+0+0 y can divide it by 3, getting 1 empty set 0.
--if I have 1 empty sets 0 y can divide it by 2, getting ½ of empty set.
But this question is very confuse to treat it now, and not important.
B.-
The only two question that I expose here are:
1.- a/a = 1 -- from equivalence principle.
2.- We can change dividend by quotient and obtain a NEW equality. So a/a = 1 give us a new equality when the change a/1= a. But this is a new equality where a doesn’t have to be equal to 1.
This property (I call commutive) and it is also given in subtraction.
Other question.-
Sorry for not use expressions as D(a,D(a,b))=b but I am same aged and don’t have accustomed to use them.