Quote:So what they're saying is you go to a supermarket, right? And you buy a cake and you decide you don't want to cut up the cake, right?

But that's exactly the trouble.  If you don't cut the cake, you aren't performing a division.   In order for your analogy to work, you would have to divide the cake into zero pieces.  But you aren't dividing anything.  1/0 is undefined, 1 not divided is 1.


Boru

(August 24, 2017 at 3:20 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:So what they're saying is you go to a supermarket, right? And you buy a cake and you decide you don't want to cut up the cake, right?

But that's exactly the trouble.  If you don't cut the cake, you aren't performing a division.   In order for your analogy to work, you would have to divide the cake into zero pieces.  But you aren't dividing anything.  1/0 is undefined, 1 not divided is 1.
Boru

To extend . . .
For the sake of argument, let's assume that when cutting, you cut a cake into equal portions, (not possible in practice).

What do we mean when we divide a cake into two?
You halve it right?
Thus, you have two pieces of cake and two people get an equal share. If they trot off with their portions, there is no cake left behind on the cutting platter.
Two people get 1/2 of the cake each, and nothing else remains for the sharing.

• Thus 1/2 means two parts of equal size, and nothing left over, (no crumbs for the poor).
  

If you cut the cake into three, then all of the above using threes, and . . .
Three people get 1/3 of the cake each, and nothing else remains for the sharing.

• Thus 1/3 means three parts of equal size, and nothing left over, (no crumbs for the poor).
  

It is therefore logical that the following must pertain:-

• 1/0 means zero parts of equal size, and nothing left over, (no crumbs for the poor).
  

So how many people get cake, and what is left behind on the platter, for the poor, (it should be nothing, right) ???

(August 10, 2017 at 7:35 am)pool the matey Wrote: You have a cake - 1

You do NOT cut this cake into pieces - 1/0

What are you left with after NOT cutting the cake? The goddamn cake, right?  

Then why the hell do
Math lords call this - 0/1= Undefined

The above analysis changes the rules, and is invalid.

What is the result of 1/(0.5) (ie. 1 ÷ 1/2)? The answer is two. But we've gone into the twilight zone. In real terms with a real cake, what is going on???
We cut a cake a half a time, get two cakes, and none left over !!!

Try it for 1/(0.000001) = 1000000 We cut the cake one one-hundred thousandth of a time, and get pieces of size a million !!!

As the divisor gets smaller, (closer to zero), in real terms, the result gets more ludicrous. The series of steps as we approach a smaller and smaller divisor, is that we divide the cake by something akin to a lesser proportion, and portions achieved approach infinity in size.

Thus at the limit, as the divisor approaches zero, getting smaller and smaller, 1/0 means we divide the cake proportionally so tiny it vanishes, yet each portion produced is infinite in size.
It simply doesn't compute. There isn't a piece of graph paper possible to display the results in full . . . as the divisor plotted on the x-axis gets smaller, so the vertical portion size vertical axis vanishes into the nether regions of the universe and beyond.  In the limit, as the divisor reaches zero, the outcome is labelled UNDEFINED.

1/0 is undefined - it has no sensible result.

...*maniacal laughter punctuated by weeping*...

(August 23, 2017 at 7:22 pm)vorlon13 Wrote:

You can do better than that example Vorls.
There's a bit there that's as crooked as a dog's hind leg! sheesh.


Here's one I whipped up just now for me mate Luckie. Enjoy. Give Esq a little bit too.

(August 24, 2017 at 1:11 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:

Mooney, that you?

---

(August 23, 2017 at 2:31 am)Luckie Wrote: Original Post:

(August 10, 2017 at 7:35 am)pool the matey Wrote: Hit green arrow

Revision of OP:

(August 10, 2017 at 11:25 am)pool the matey Wrote: Fuckin hell I wrote

What I really meant was

So, did you read what Steel and Magi said, Pool? 

Are you familiar with proofs? Double checking division with multiplication for instance.
A=B/C is the same as B=A multiplied with C

So if you have A=10/C  then multiply A and C and you will get 10. 

10=X/2 Again, multiply 2 by 10 and you can solve for X.

Smart Math People Wrote:1/x  does tend to −∞ as you approach zero from the left, and ∞  as you approach from the right:

That these limits are not equal is why 1/0  is undefined.

---

https://math.stackexchange.com/questions...s-infinity

*Luckie sucks at maths

(August 10, 2017 at 3:33 pm)chimp3 Wrote: I was a cook for 15 years in restaurants. If your cake recipe is measured in cups/tsp/tbsp it will probably be off. The volume measurements depend on consistent sifting of the dry ingredients and tamping of the dry wet ingredients (such as butter/ brown sugar). The best cake recipes are measured in weight not volume.
As far as how big a piece you eat or what you drink with it , I say "No stress , enjoy!".

So.. to be clear.. the heavier or lighter my cake mix is will determine how it bakes up and if so, which bakes better? Heavier or lighter??

*Luckie sucks at cooking

(August 10, 2017 at 11:25 pm)Fireball Wrote: I think that they are both the same, but a case could be made for "pie hole" being a bit south of said orifice, at least on teh womens.

This put the phrase "Let them eat cake!" Into a completely different light for me, thanks.
Also, just throwin it out there-- TRUMP LoveS him some chocolate cake! Best cake, ever, he says. 😂

(August 11, 2017 at 1:31 am)Losty Wrote: If anyone should wish for a cake all they need to do is pay the postage and I shall make them a cake and send it to them.

---

If you don't cut the cake then wouldn't you have 1 cake not zero? So that would be 1/1

---

I didn't have a cake for my birthday. Maybe I'll make one tomorrow for my unbirthday. Cake sounds yummy.

What?! The official giver of cakes did not herself get a cake?! 


A verrrrryyy merry unbirthday to youuuuuuuuu!



Look! It even has turd cakes for all of CLs poopie followers (myself included.. chocolate, Yum!)

This response officially wins the thread.  From this point forward all posts must include cake pics.  That is official.  This one is for Lucky and Losty to share equally.  Since they they require two equal pieces they will obviously need to employ just one cut.  

---

[quote pid='1609901' dateline='1503825174']




Here's one I whipped up just now for me mate Luckie. Enjoy. Give Esq a little bit too.

[/quote]

EPIC. LOVE IT!

Ps I always give Esq a piece it's in the contract

(August 10, 2017 at 7:35 am)pool the matey Wrote: You don't have a cake - 0

OK.

Quote:You cut this virtually non existent cake into two pieces - 0/2

So, 0 represents cake, / represents cutting, 2 represents resulting number of pieces.

[quote]What are you left with? NOTHING

Math lords call this - 0/2=0

Ok, so that's in the clear. Moving on :

You have a cake - 1

OK.

Quote:You do NOT cut this cake into pieces - 1/0

Since / represents cutting, but you're NOT cutting, your error is in adding /0 in this case.

If you start with 1 and don't cut, you don't add /x, and are left with 1.

(September 7, 2017 at 3:27 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(August 10, 2017 at 7:35 am)pool the matey Wrote: You don't have a cake - 0

OK.

Quote:You cut this virtually non existent cake into two pieces - 0/2

So, 0 represents cake, / represents cutting, 2 represents resulting number of pieces.

Quote:What are you left with? NOTHING

Math lords call this - 0/2=0

Ok, so that's in the clear. Moving on :

You have a cake - 1

OK.

Quote:You do NOT cut this cake into pieces - 1/0

Since / represents cutting, but you're NOT cutting, your error is in adding /0 in this case.

If you start with 1 and don't cut, you don't add /x, and are left with 1.

The thing is that in math terms that is an operation. It is well constructed given analisys (part of a division ring of the set E with operations + and × that applies the neutral element, the absorbent element (1=/=0) and the distributive law)

Beginners should start by buiding a set E with operation +. Then move on. Its called an algebraic group.

Some threads are better left off dead