## Prove me wrong

- Abdul Muntakim Rafi
**Posts:**173**Joined:**Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:07 pm**Location:**bangladesh,the earth,milkyway,local group.

### Re: Prove me wrong

Yeah... This contradiction leads us to $x/0=undefined$ when $x$ is not equal to $0$ and $0/0=indeterminate$ ...

**Man himself is the master of his fate...**

### Re: Prove me wrong

What is the definition of $0/0$?Abdul Muntakim Rafi wrote: $0/0=indeterminate$ ...

- Abdul Muntakim Rafi
**Posts:**173**Joined:**Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:07 pm**Location:**bangladesh,the earth,milkyway,local group.

### Re: Prove me wrong

That it may take any value... so its $indeterminate$...

**Man himself is the master of his fate...**

### Re: Prove me wrong

That's not a definition. That's nonsense.

### Re: Prove me wrong

Look at the definition of division again, and prove how $0/0$ is defined. You cannot just make up random ideas and claim that to be a definition. If you could, then flying cows would be real because you can define flying cows as flying cows.

- nafistiham
**Posts:**829**Joined:**Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:56 pm**Location:**24.758613,90.400161-
**Contact:**

### Re: Prove me wrong

the problem is getting too messy to proceed.isn't it?

why can't we just say that it's just the definition?

even in the MOs the stage persons answer the q by saying just "we can divide anything by $0$"

why can't we just say that it's just the definition?

even in the MOs the stage persons answer the q by saying just "we can divide anything by $0$"

\[\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}e^{\frac{2 \pi i k}{n}}=0\]

Using $L^AT_EX$ and following the rules of the forum are very easy but really important, too.Please co-operate.

Using $L^AT_EX$ and following the rules of the forum are very easy but really important, too.Please co-operate.

### Re: Prove me wrong

There is nothing messy about it. Mathematics is a very precise science. it does not work just by saying things, no matter who says it.

Look at the definitions again:

Multiplicative inverse: The multiplicative inverse of a number x is a number y such that xy=1. Usually the inverse is written $x^{-1}$ or $1/x$

Division: The division of a number x by a number y is xy−1 where y−1 is the multiplicative inverse of y. Usually this is written $x/y$.

Now define $0/0$, if you can.

Look at the definitions again:

Multiplicative inverse: The multiplicative inverse of a number x is a number y such that xy=1. Usually the inverse is written $x^{-1}$ or $1/x$

Division: The division of a number x by a number y is xy−1 where y−1 is the multiplicative inverse of y. Usually this is written $x/y$.

Now define $0/0$, if you can.

### Re: Prove me wrong

In fact, what Tanvir vai is trying to say is, if you can't define something at all, then how can it make any sense, whatever the field is, real or complex!

One one thing is neutral in the universe, that is $0$.

- Abdul Muntakim Rafi
**Posts:**173**Joined:**Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:07 pm**Location:**bangladesh,the earth,milkyway,local group.

### Re: Prove me wrong

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero Visit this page...

See the section: Division as the inverse of multiplication

See the section: Division as the inverse of multiplication

**Man himself is the master of his fate...**

### Re: Prove me wrong

The wikipedia article is also wrong. It makes the same mistake as Rafi. Division is not magic. It is simply multiplication by inverse. When you say $0/0$ it means multiplying $0$ by the inverse of $0$. The inverse of $0$ cannot be defined, and therefore $0/0$ cannot be defined either.