MHB Why is dividing by zero impossible in math?

AI Thread Summary
Dividing by zero is impossible in mathematics because it leads to contradictions. For example, attempting to express a division like 5/0 asks how many zeros fit into 5, which is impossible since adding zeros never reaches 5. When a non-zero number is divided by zero, it results in an undefined value because there is no number that satisfies the equation. In contrast, dividing zero by zero is considered indeterminate since it can equal any number, but lacks a unique solution. Understanding these concepts is crucial, especially in the context of limits in calculus, where different scenarios can yield different outcomes.
mathdad
Messages
1,280
Reaction score
0
We know division by zero is not possible but what is the math reason why it is impossible to divide by zero?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Let's say you wanted to do 5/0, then you're asking "how many 0's are there in 5?"

Well, try adding up 0's until you get to 5...

Hang on, 0 + 0 = 0... If I keep adding 0 we still stay at 0...

How can we ever possibly get to 5?
 
Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.

In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.<br /> <br /> - - - Updated - - -<br /> <br /> Saying that "\frac{a}{0}= c" is equivalent to "a= 0*c". But 0 times anything is 0 so that would say a= 0.<br /> <br /> In fact, some texts make a distinction between \frac{a}{0}, for a non-zero, and \frac{0}{0}. If a\ne 0 then \frac{a}{0}= c, for any number, c, is equivalent to a= 0*c= 0 which is false. There is NO number c that satisfies that so we say it is "undefined" or simply impossible.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, \frac{0}{0}= c is equivalent to 0= 0*c= 0 which <b>is</b> true- but is true for <b>any</b> number c. There is no unique number c such that this is true so we say that it is "undetermined".<br /> <br /> The difference is really only important in "limits". If I am trying to find \lim_{x\to a}\frac{f(x)}{g(x)} and find that g, separately, goes to 0 while f goes to a non-zero number, I have the case \frac{a}{0} for a non-zero: there is no such limit. But If both f and g go to 0 then there still might be a limit. For example, if f(x)= x^2- 9 and g(x)= x- 3 both f(3)= 0 and g(3)= 0. But for x <b>not</b> equal to 0, \frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \frac{(x- 3)(x+ 3)}{x- 3}= x+ 3 so \lim_{x\to 3}\frac{x^2- 9}{x- 3}= \lim_{x\to 3} x+ 3= 6.
 
Great information.

- - - Updated - - -

Say there are 5 people in a particular classroom. They came to class without a pencil. If the principal walks into the classroom and tells me to distribute one pencil per student but I have no pencils, no one will get a pencil. How can I divide a number by nothing? So, number ÷ nothing = undefined.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
47
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
40
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Back
Top