Are we teleporting?

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

So I've been reading this bit about introduction to calculus for noobs: http://www-math.mit.edu/~djk/calculus_be...ion03.html
And i found something particularly disturbing so thought i'd come here and tell everyone about it.


About what i found disturbing:

[start rant]

It's this particular math: 
1 * 0 =0
2 * 0 = 0
3 * 0 = 0
4 * 0 = 0
etc

I have seen this in my school but i hadn't actually given much thought to it,until now .__. 

Consider this math: 
1 * 0 = ?
1 * 0 = 0

Most of the people will read it as 1 multiplied by 0 gives 0.
When i looked at it what i saw was kind of wierd.This is how i saw it:

# I go to a supermarket 
# I buy x egg(s) 
# I take the egg(s) in my right hand
# The universe forgets that i had anything in my right hand
# I give the cashier what i have in my right hand [which is nothing since the universe doesn't remember it anymore.]
# I get billed for 0 dollars

This is the logic of 1 * 0 = 0.

But is that really true? o.0 Quite obviously not,right? 
Even though the universe forgets that i had anything in my right hand doesn't necessarily mean that i didn't have anything in my right hand now does it?

Shouldn't the logic be: 

# I go to a supermarket 
# I buy x egg(s) 
# I take the egg(s) in my right hand
# The universe forgets that i had anything in my right hand
# I give the cashier what i have in my right hand
# I get billed for x dollar (1 egg costs 1 dollar - for the sake of the argument)

If that is what the logic should be then doesn't that mean :

1 * 0 = N
2 * 0 = N
3 * 0 = N
etc
where N is the set of all natural numbers?
Why N? Well because by picking an egg from the supermarket i acknowledge that there are egg(s) in my right hand but still maintain ambiguity as to the no of egg(s) i have in my right hand.But since i have acknowledged that there are egg(s) - the no. of egg(s) will have to be greater than 0

Jesus fucking Christ,math is so fucking complicated how did you guys ever learn it?! >_<

[end rant]


Ok,back to reading..