Can you write both of those situations out in a sum for me?
Who does your childs homework?
- Thread starter travelbug
- Start date
Can you write both of those situations out in a sum for me?
Alright, I'll play along - I'm up for a laugh! The way you see it is completely wrong. There is absolutely no doubt about that. As explained here under "Properties", multiplication is commutative. In other words:
There is also the identity element:
And lastly the zero element:
Whether you like them or not, these are some of the most basic laws of mathematics....
Excel never lies
Type in
=0*2 in one cell and =2*0 in another....
Commutative Law for multiplication a x b = b x a
Cheers,
The Y-man
Last edited:
no mate - because the two and the zero are on the same side of the equation - or the same side of the equals side.
2x0 = 0
0x2 = 0
therefore no matter which way it is expressed like this, the answer will always equal zero.
ie (6÷3) x (1÷0) = (9÷0) is the same as 2x0=0.
it would only be incorrect if you moved a number from one side of the equation to the other - with three possibilities.
0 = 2x0 (correct)
0 = 0x2 (correct)
2 = 0x0 (incorrect)
have you heard the old saying that "50% of something is better than 100% of nothing"?
rule - when you multiply/divide ANYTHING by zero, you get zero.
see, the purpose of formula is the result, not the precedent. i understand your point - the precedent having 2 oranges before you multiplied then with nothing leaves you with the result of 2 oranges that you started with, left on the table. but the result of multiplyng them with nothing means the precedent was there was nothing to multiply them with, therefore the result is you have gained nothing - or zero.
your point doesn't work because the minute you say "i have 2 oranges multiplied by 1 orange - now i have three oranges on the table" - or 2x1=3 - which is incorrect.
Yeah ok, no one is telling me anything I haven't heard before, but if you use maths in a physical form as in the example of the two $100 notes on the table, how can they not exist.
Post 12 says i've got $200.
Post 28 says the bloke I lost the bet to, has it.
Post 29 says it is physically there.
Post 31 says it's in Quolls pocket.
Post 35 says it dissapeared off the lawyers desk.
It doesn't just vanish.
Post 12 says i've got $200.
Post 28 says the bloke I lost the bet to, has it.
Post 29 says it is physically there.
Post 31 says it's in Quolls pocket.
Post 35 says it dissapeared off the lawyers desk.
It doesn't just vanish.
Sorry BC but just to clarify if you divide by zero you don't get zero - you get infinity.
x.0 = 0
x/0 = ∞
So your equation above is still correct - it's just that for both sides the result is ∞.
both them same as both have no value and all value simultaneously...
no battler - it doesn't vanish - but the RESULT is nothing, but the PRECEDENT is two.
you made nothing by investing $2 with a zero percent return.
as per the equation.
2x0=0
no battler - it doesn't vanish - but the RESULT is nothing, but the PRECEDENT is two.
you made nothing by investing $2 with a zero percent return.
as per the equation.
2x0=0
Yes it does. You are confusing multiplication with addition.
If you multiplied your $100 by 10 to get $1000, where did the new $900 come from? These notes don't just "appear".
In this case you have 10 groups of $100 notes = $1000
In your case you have 0 groups of $100 notes = $0
So $100x0 = $0
And BC I note your smiley but just to be clear there is a world of difference between zero and infinity. No such thing as simultaneously zero and infinity...
precisely - that's why 2x1=3 is incorrect - even though precedent (2 and 1) says you have three things on the table.
if 2x0=2, then 2x1=3 - when in fact - in addition, that IS correct.
if 2x0=2, then 2x1=3 - when in fact - in addition, that IS correct.
But you've still got the $2, even without a % gain?
Confusing two things here - a 0% gain (no gain or loss) and multiplication by zero (a 100% loss).
yes you do, but that's the precedent - not the result.
best definition i could ever find regarding multiples of zero was on wiki, funnily enuf.
how many people can you satify with one apple?
this goes to show that zero can be both nothing and infinity all at once.
however, it also shows that if you cannot multiply by zero and get any more than zero by reversing the situation.
if you have people prepared to accept one apple each (1), and wish to satisfy nobody (0), how many apples do you need (need being opposite of have)...? answer? zero (0).
1x0=0
if you have people prepared to accept five apples each (5), and wish to satisfy ten people (10), how many apples do you need ...? answer? fifty (50).
5x10=50
it's not about what you have - the precedent, it's about the result - the requirement.
But nubmers dont work that way
5 x 4 = 20
4 x 5 = 20
if 0 x 2 = 0
then 0 x 2 must = zero
I'm put it in terms that I think you may understand Battler.
Lets say a landlord has an IP which you are renting out for $1000 a month.
But your tenants don't pay thier rent at all! Or you could say $1000 x 0 = $0
Same thing next month, they still don't pay, so it's now $2000 x 0 = $0
The next day the landlord goes over there with a cricket bat to beat the rent out of them, but they have taken off and his house is trashed
The $2000 never existed, it never vansihed, the rent payments were never made.
ps: I hope you're trolling or that theory about investors being of an above average intelligence might be at threat
Lets say a landlord has an IP which you are renting out for $1000 a month.
But your tenants don't pay thier rent at all! Or you could say $1000 x 0 = $0
Same thing next month, they still don't pay, so it's now $2000 x 0 = $0
The next day the landlord goes over there with a cricket bat to beat the rent out of them, but they have taken off and his house is trashed
The $2000 never existed, it never vansihed, the rent payments were never made.
ps: I hope you're trolling or that theory about investors being of an above average intelligence might be at threat
Getting back to the kids homework
The reason I read this post to start with was because I was helping the youngest daughter 12y with her homework the other day.
She had to find information on a mathematician and they had a choice of 6 so she picked Isaac Newton. I told her to google him and read. Well she couldn't find the right information so I searched, found what she needed and then suggested different search words for her, depending on what mine where, and when she found different web sites I could suggest things too her that would point her to the spot that had the info. So I did do the homework but didn't give it too her once I had done it, I used the info I then had to assist her in finding what I had found, which took longer, as it always does.
Cheers
Graeme
The reason I read this post to start with was because I was helping the youngest daughter 12y with her homework the other day.
She had to find information on a mathematician and they had a choice of 6 so she picked Isaac Newton. I told her to google him and read. Well she couldn't find the right information so I searched, found what she needed and then suggested different search words for her, depending on what mine where, and when she found different web sites I could suggest things too her that would point her to the spot that had the info. So I did do the homework but didn't give it too her once I had done it, I used the info I then had to assist her in finding what I had found, which took longer, as it always does.
Cheers
Graeme
Hi BC
Sorry but not correct. The sentence after the bit you quoted goes on to say:
Y-man has it most correct - my statement was an oversimplification based on common usage. The calculation of x/0 is meaningless by itself. However the concept can be attacked by limit theory. As in:
The limit of x/y (as y approaches zero) approaches infinity.
x/0 can't equal any number because then you would be able to say x/0=2 or x/0 = 10 or x/0=0 which you definitely can't. The numbers of zero and "approaching infinity" are very different.
This is way OT but I guess it all goes to the perils of home schooling / homework help!
Anyway - getting back to the topic at hand...
no i didn't mean "approcahing infinity" i meant "infinity" - as in, the imaginary number that is both everything and nothing all at once.
if zero is nothing, and infinity is nothing, then thay CAN be the same.
