# Mystery of Zero Resolved



## KDroid (Jun 24, 2011)

I read this sometime back in the newspaper. However, I forgot to share it over here...

Ankur Tiwari is the first person who had invented a new mathematics formula which is capable of dividing by Zero. This innovative formula gives us vast field for new researches and inventions. AnkuR Tiwari had named this formula as ‘Bhartiya New Rule for Fraction’ whose detail explanation is given in AnkuR Tiwari’s book ‘Mystery of Zero - Shoonya Ka Rahasya’.

Check out his website.

Although his work has been verified by CBSE, some people address it as rubbish. (And it might be!)


----------



## noob (Jun 24, 2011)

total BS. 
Mystery of Zero â€“ Shoonya Ka Rahasya | Pothi.com

+ .CO.CC DOMAIN ?? WTF...


----------



## paul.soumyabrata (Jun 24, 2011)

If division of zero is possible and lead to a finite value, then the whole of laws mathematics have to be written again. It is totally BS.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 25, 2011)

paul.soumyabrata said:


> the whole of laws mathematics have to be written again. It is totally BS.


That would be awesome!


----------



## tkin (Jun 25, 2011)

OH MY GAWD, this guy should be thrown out of the country, he is giving india a bad name, if this is possible all the laws of physics and maths will have to rewritten again. 

Is this one of those mathematics that we do? Like prove 2x2=2 or like that? What was he smoking when he wrote that? And verified by cbse? That board is ran by buffoons(all edu boards in india are run by them), try getting it verified and published in nature magazine.

Also look at this: Dainik Bhaskar e-Paper Rajasthan | Punjab | Haryana | Madhya Pradesh | Jharkhand | Chhattisgarh

This is worse than "what's his name ethical hacker kid," the worse possible scam, no matter how brilliant he is still a kid, I had never seen any kid do something like this before, kids can be hackers, or scientists based on older research and works but this is fundamental mathematics, I'm getting too riled up right?

And one last rant, read the comments here, seriously how low can you get? *pothi.com/pothi/book/ankur-tiwari-mystery-zero-–-shoonya-ka-rahasya

Fcking scammer.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 25, 2011)

> hello, ankur.
> 
> Great work my son.
> 
> ...


roflmfao!


----------



## tkin (Jun 25, 2011)

SyGeek said:


> roflmfao!


Written by his uneducated parents? Or by himself?

More comments here: Mystery of Zero Resolved
Read it for the laugh of your life.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 25, 2011)

But, on a serious note, how do we know that it ain't just BS, we haven't even read it, nor do we have true knowledge of mathematics. Although, I agree that there probably is a catch here, but if mathematics follows the true laws of nature, it should define the mystery of zero, or maybe 0 doesn't even exist, but we do have information about 0, so it probably does exist. 

So, now the mystery is upon us, and we're left to solve it, alone, nature won't help us here. Either 0 is non-existent completely, i.e. it is an illusion of human mind to solve other corresponding mysteries. Is it just true within our illusion..ah, wait..this is too complicated, I'm leaving it upon the professionals.


----------



## tkin (Jun 25, 2011)

SyGeek said:


> But, on a serious note, how do we know that it ain't just BS, we haven't even read it, nor do we have true knowledge of mathematics. Although, I agree that there probably is a catch here, but if mathematics follows the true laws of nature, it should define the mystery of zero, or maybe 0 doesn't even exist, but we do have information about 0, so it probably does exist. Now the mystery is upon us, and we're left to solve it, alone, nature won't help us.


Does not work that way, it bends the very fundamental laws of physics.

Lets take for an example, from Newtons formula:
F=m.a

Now, say m=0 and F!=0, so by this rule applying a finite force on a massless body a finite acceleration can be produced, this directly violates one of the fundamental laws of physics, you can use this notation on all the fundamental laws of physics and break them, even quantam mechanics cannot violate any of these laws(not for macro bodies anyway), so its not possible.


PS: Please take a look how scammers had taken over the media, remember the nasa kid? You must have read the news back a while ago? Read the rest here:

Original story: Shooting star: UP boy tops NASA - Times Of India

The real news: Gelf Magazine NASA's Prodigy Takes India for a Ride

The fake certificate from NASA: *im.rediff.com/news/2005/feb/23kalam.jpg


----------



## Zangetsu (Jun 25, 2011)

@kunal: thanx...I was getting bored so will read the whole thread in detail....


----------



## Vyom (Jun 25, 2011)

A Real Thesis, or a Marketing scam for a book... only mathematicians can prove it, and only Time can unfold the mystery!!


----------



## ashis_lakra (Jun 25, 2011)

seriously if this is true, all rules will bend and supercomputer architecture and ALU needs to be changed, it means.. your computer will go dumb... binary bits 0 and 1 will be useless.. no use of NAND, OR, XAT gates .. its totally unbearable lol..


----------



## sygeek (Jun 25, 2011)

If science (maths) can prove the existence of 0, then why can't it prove a simple arithmetical equation?


----------



## tkin (Jun 25, 2011)

SyGeek said:


> If science (maths) can prove the existence of 0, then why can't it prove a simple arithmetical equation?


Because the equation does not make sense.

Here's an example:

x*0=0  [say x=5]
=>(x*0)/0=0/0
=>x=0

Does this make any sense? The guy above tried to prove this.


----------



## Vyom (Jun 25, 2011)

If his equations can prove that ZERO doesn't really mean "NOTHING", only then am I interested!!
For it will be a little relief to let the parents watch the marks then!


----------



## doomgiver (Jun 25, 2011)

dude, total fail.

he should be put in nursery and be given 0 marks for the rest of his life


----------



## bharat_14101991 (Jun 25, 2011)

now this is hilarious... now i will go to my bank tomorrow... ask them for my balance(i.e. 0)... gift them this book and yippy i can divide my balance with 0 and become the next bill gates 

NOTE: the above formula can be applied anywhere, shops, malls, hotels.. ANYWHERE


----------



## doomgiver (Jun 25, 2011)

anyone has a account on that site?
i wanna troll some


----------



## tkin (Jun 25, 2011)

ROFL Scam of the century.


----------



## Tech&ME (Jun 25, 2011)

ha ha 

That guy must have been in a prison which made him MAD to write that BOOK!

Throw him out of this country!!

physics will go wild! Newton would have killed him, if he would have been alive to hear that


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 25, 2011)

I am still curious though. Not that I'll buy the book.


----------



## doomgiver (Jun 25, 2011)

its filled with santa-banta maths jokes. worth every penny


----------



## Arsenal_Gunners (Jun 25, 2011)

At best it is a case of
Mathematical fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh,and local media has _zero_ credibility.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 26, 2011)

0/0 = 0/0 <=> Nothing/nothing = nothing/nothing

Nothing is nothing, thus it doesn't make sense to divide it, the answer thus is nothing (on both the sides).

Now,
Nothing = Nothing <=> 0=0

Nothing is nothing, we all know that. Thus, this equation doesn't exist and it is nothing.

0=0 => 0 => Nothing

What did I just say? Nothing..


----------



## tkin (Jun 26, 2011)

SyGeek said:


> 0/0 = 0/0 <=> Nothing/nothing = nothing/nothing
> 
> Nothing is nothing, thus it doesn't make sense to divide it, the answer thus is nothing (on both the sides).
> 
> ...


I want to kill myself.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 26, 2011)

tkin said:


> I want to kill myself.



Sure go ahead. Your vital signs will indicate the very number.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 26, 2011)

tkin said:


> I want to kill myself.


A giant step towards the betterment of the society.


----------



## KDroid (Jun 26, 2011)

SyGeek said:


> 0/0 = 0/0 <=> Nothing/nothing = nothing/nothing
> 
> Nothing is nothing, thus it doesn't make sense to divide it, the answer thus is nothing (on both the sides).
> 
> ...



  Hillarious!!

Btw, is anyone ready to shell out Rs.250 for a 18-page book?


----------



## Extreme Gamer (Jun 26, 2011)

B.N.R.F. - B.N.R.F.

look at the formula. he says for X/Y, A=(X/2)[1/Y'+1/Y"] where Y' is the largest decimal no. before Y and Y" is the smallest decimal no. after Y.

In that case the number's decimal will go on till infinity in case of Y' and Y"!

For example, if Y=1, then Y'=0.9R (where R= recurring) and Y"=1.0000....001, where there are an infinite number of 0s before the decimal 1.

Thus, his formula is BS.

He should stop that nonsense immediately.

Unless Stephen Hawking can prove it otherwise, I dont believe it.


----------



## Zangetsu (Jun 26, 2011)

kunal.d said:


> Check out his website.
> Although his work has been verified by CBSE, *some people address it as rubbish.* (And it might be!)



the website is crap made in mspaint i guess....

& its not some people but all people....

limits,calculus,integration mathematician ghost will be crying out for ruining their effort...

& to reveal the secret we have to spend rs250..this is all @$232!!@#


----------



## ssk_the_gr8 (Jun 26, 2011)

kunal.d said:


> Hillarious!!
> 
> Btw, is anyone ready to shell out Rs.250 for a 18-page book?



it's an 18 page book ... never!


----------



## Zangetsu (Jun 26, 2011)

ssk_the_gr8 said:


> it's an 18 page book ... never!



its a money making business & nothing else


----------



## ssk_the_gr8 (Jun 26, 2011)

tkin said:


> I want to kill myself.



good idea!


----------



## Prime_Coder (Jun 26, 2011)

kunal.d said:


> Hillarious!!
> 
> Btw, is anyone ready to shell out Rs.250 for a 18-page book?



Who is going to buy such things? Prove the same thing to the seller of the book and say to give it for 0 rupees..


----------



## tkin (Jun 26, 2011)

Why are you people trying to kill me? 

On a serious note, researched a lot on similar topics today, learned a lot, tried to use that stupid formula and couldn't get a clue, called up my maths teacher(taught iit maths), he thought I was mad.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 26, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:


> B.N.R.F. - B.N.R.F.
> 
> look at the formula. he says for X/Y, A=(X/2)[1/Y'+1/Y"] where Y' is the largest decimal no. before Y and Y" is the smallest decimal no. after Y.
> 
> ...



In fact 0.9R = 1 (try converting 0.9R into fraction)
And a 0.0000...1 isn't a number anyway (we're not talking of limits).

Weird "formula". BS IMO.

EDIT: He is not talking in terms of repetends though,,it won't be 0.9R

He just has to prove, 1/Y' + 1/Y'' = 2/Y. Has he actually done that? And how does this "new" formula help in solving problems, I wonder.



kunal.d said:


> Hillarious!!
> 
> Btw, is anyone ready to shell out Rs.250 for a 18-page book?



Nope. Taking out pictures is easier and cheaper as well, if you are so inclined.


----------



## abhijangda (Jun 26, 2011)

ha ha ha ha 

just can't stop laughing after reading this article. 

This boy is a big BS.


----------



## sygeek (Jun 27, 2011)

I'd rather remain silent here, neither I'm knowledgeable up to this level to debate on this topic, nor do I give a sh!t about maths. I'd advice the same for others with this case.


----------



## thetechfreak (Jun 27, 2011)

The formala is wrong. The souls of Archimedes and all others will be crying.





> Hello, I am a writer of 'Mystery of Zero -
> Shoonya Ka Rahasya'. Thank you very much for your interest
> in Bhartiya New Rule for Fraction
> (B.N.R.F.) * My formula had already changed the
> ...


Really? 
A very funny comment


> i have invented a formula that can cure
> cancer!!!
> ahahaha!!!! hail me as a god, i have
> cured cancer!!!! i have invented a formula that can
> ...


----------



## doomgiver (Jun 27, 2011)

actually, thats my comment, cant you tell


----------



## abhidev (Jun 27, 2011)

hilarious..........well said in the movie 'Behja fry'....he is nothing but a 'Bawasir ka phoda'..........


----------



## tkin (Jun 27, 2011)

doomgiver said:


> actually, thats my comment, cant you tell


ROFL, justice had been delivered.

Also one more thing:

If x/0=y, then y*0=x, so multiplying any number with 0 will yield a result having non zero value, also since this is true, 0 must have a sign, so -0 or +0? More I think, more my head hurts.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 27, 2011)

tkin said:


> If x/0=y, then y*0=x, so multiplying any number with 0 will yield a result having non zero value, also since this is true, 0 must have a sign, so -0 or +0? More I think, more my head hurts.


Is he really claiming a non-zero values for y/0?
In his website, he also quotes Brahmagupta who claimed 0/0 = 0 in his text. Though x/0=0 (if x!=0) doesn't make much sense...


----------



## tkin (Jun 27, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Is he really claiming a non-zero values for y/0?


Ofcourse, if you divide a number by another number (both non zero) you get a non zero value, if he proves dividing something by zero is infinity or any other abstract symbol he made up that would be crazy.


----------



## Zapper (Jun 27, 2011)

*He might be able to tell the exact value of pi also!!!!!!*

BTW ho he got those certificates he's backing his formula with?????


----------



## tkin (Jun 27, 2011)

Zapper said:


> *He might be able to tell the exact value of pi also!!!!!!*
> 
> BTW ho he got those certificates he's backing his formula with?????


Umm, lets see, A PRINTING PRESS?


----------



## Extreme Gamer (Jun 27, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> In fact 0.9R = 1 (try converting 0.9R into fraction)
> And a 0.0000...1 isn't a number anyway (we're not talking of limits).
> 
> Weird "formula". BS IMO.
> ...


well 0.00...01 I meant that the there are infinite 0s between integer 0 and the decimal 1.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jun 27, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:


> well 1.00...01 I meant that the there are infinite 0s between integer 1 and the decimal 1.



I am not sure such a number exists, there can be no fractional representation of such a number.


----------



## cute.bandar (Jun 27, 2011)

I. hate. this. thing. guy. scam . with .a passion.

I have asked for the book to be taken down off the site: 

You can do so too @ Contact | Pothi.com

Also to leave a bad review you can use the following logins:

username: thinkthink 
password: 3upRTjLtq8

username: logicrules
password: thinkdigit


----------



## Alok (Jun 29, 2011)

Hmm....
Let's see practically-:

Well how do you divide a piece of cake if there is no one???
I'll eat ..


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jun 30, 2011)

There ARE mathematical ways to handle infinitely small numbers (I still remember slogging my ass off trying to make sense of (h -> 0)) and infinitely large numbers too.

Idea is that when you have a fixed finite known number and are dividing it by any extremely small number, the value is infinity and a product with such a number yields 0 as the answer.

But when you have two numbers that are BOTH infinitely small or BOTH infinitely large and are doing an operation with them, then you need to consider how the numbers originated.

Lemme give an example (for infinity based operations):

Lets summate X from 1 to infinity. The result is infinity but lets call it i0.
Lets summate X from 5 to infinity. The result is infinity but lets call it i1.

Now perform operation 5/i0
The result is ZERO because you are dividing a finite number by infinity.

Now perform operation 5/i1
The result is still ZERO because you are dividing a finite number by infinity.

Now perform operation 5/(i0 - i1)

The result is 0.5 (and not infinity), because i0 - i1 = 1+2+3+4 = 10, which we know because of the way the numbers i0 and i1 originated.

And in differential and integral calculus, we have ways to describe how to handle infinite summations and infinite divisions.

Point I'm trying to tell is, high school mathematics already has ways to deal with zero. There is no "mystery" about it anywhere.


----------



## Desmond (Jul 1, 2011)

What are the odds that no one in the world, in the entire history of mathematics, has gone through the whole divide-by-zero concept. I bet someone might have already thought about what this guy claims and dismissed it. Only this guy has the ***** to blabber about it.

@Gautham, well explained
Off topic: Your name says MetalHead, yet you have and acoustic guitar in your avatar?


----------



## mediator (Jul 1, 2011)

MHG said:
			
		

> Lemme give an example (for infinity based operations):
> 
> Lets summate X from 1 to infinity. The result is infinity but lets call it i0.
> Lets summate X from 5 to infinity. The result is infinity but lets call it i1.
> ...


Your fundamentals are weak. When infinity comes into the picture it consumes or absorbs i.e infinite+infinte=infinite, infinite-infinite=infinite 

(Note : Same is observed at the speed of light). Thus, "operation 5/(i0 - i1)" is also zero! Similarly, Universe is inifnite. Can you take infinite out of it? If you can visualize the infinite, then you are actually limiting it. Your logic, "i0-i1=10" tells that you are treating infinite as some finite.

Anyways, an interesting book for this kind of topic would be "the Tao of Physics" by Fritjof Capra 

PS : I wish Indians maintain the same spirit of questioning and enquiry that they showed for "Mystery of Zero by Ankur" when it comes to reading books written by westerners.


----------



## Zangetsu (Jul 1, 2011)

i only know that infinity means it can't be counted....


----------



## Vyom (Jul 1, 2011)

mediator said:


> If you can visualize the infinite, then you are actually limiting it.



Stole my words. Completely Agree! 
There are many things in the world, that are impossible to visualize. Infinity is one of them.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 2, 2011)

DeSmOnD dAvId said:


> @Gautham, well explained
> Off topic: Your name says MetalHead, yet you have and acoustic guitar in your avatar?


lol back then didn't have an electric... should update pic with my electric I guess 


mediator said:


> Your fundamentals are weak. When infinity comes into the picture it consumes or absorbs i.e infinite+infinte=infinite, infinite-infinite=infinite
> 
> (Note : Same is observed at the speed of light). Thus, "operation 5/(i0 - i1)" is also zero! Similarly, Universe is inifnite. Can you take infinite out of it? If you can visualize the infinite, then you are actually limiting it. Your logic, "i0-i1=10" tells that you are treating infinite as some finite.
> 
> ...



(yeah my fundamentals ARE a bit weak that's why I struggled through maths) but i0-i1 = 10 still stands. I mean think of it as integration (damn I wish bbcode had math fonts).

(Integral a to b) = (integral a to J) + (integral J to b) where J is a number between a and b and the integral is continuous in the interval )a,b) which is a law of integration.

Above relation also gives:
(integral a to J) = (integral a to b) - (integral J to b)

Now in my example replace integration with simple summation, a with 0 and b with infinity and J with 5.


PS: crap man you are forcing me to touch (@1(U1U5 again... h8ed it....


----------



## tkin (Jul 2, 2011)

MetalheadGautham said:


> lol back then didn't have an electric... should update pic with my electric I guess
> 
> 
> (yeah my fundamentals ARE a bit weak that's why I struggled through maths) but i0-i1 = 10 still stands. I mean think of it as integration (damn I wish bbcode had math fonts).
> ...


That integration is still finite, but you cannot use the above example when you are integrating to infinity, at least that's what I think.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 2, 2011)

vineet369 said:


> Stole my words. Completely Agree!
> There are many things in the world, that are impossible to visualize. Infinity is one of them.



woops didn't see this before...

Well you can't visualize infinity completely. But using a generating function for infinity it IS possible (kinda) to see how it grows. For example, an exponential graph (y = e^x) curves upwards. We don't know where it ends or how far it curves. But we KNOW it curves. Same way (y=x) graph is a straight line cutting origin and at 45 degrees to both X and Y axis. We cannot visualize how far it goes but we know its shape.

Anyway, my point was not about visualizing infinity in the first place. All I did was refuse to simplify some terms till they're in a state where it becomes inevitable.

OK here's a way to understand it:

Imagine a planet where people have infinite lives (or imagine you're a vampire from twilight ).

There is alien/vampire X born in 1675 and alien/vampire Y born in 1680. No matter what year you take (even near infinity) they have an age difference of 5 years always   



tkin said:


> That integration is still finite, but you cannot use the above example when you are integrating to infinity, at least that's what I think.



Well... Lets wait for more replies then. I'm sure there are plenty of math pros in this forum.


----------



## tkin (Jul 2, 2011)

MetalheadGautham said:


> woops didn't see this before...
> 
> Well you can't visualize infinity completely. But using a generating function for infinity it IS possible (kinda) to see how it grows. For example, an exponential graph (y = e^x) curves upwards. We don't know where it ends or how far it curves. But we KNOW it curves. Same way (y=x) graph is a straight line cutting origin and at 45 degrees to both X and Y axis. We cannot visualize how far it goes but we know its shape.
> 
> ...


Going by your example lets say after infinite years you want to know their age difference, you do not know their age difference from start, neither do they(forgot), now can you calculate it? As far you and them are concerned both of them had lived for an eternity and you don't know how 'old' they exactly are, so you can no differentiate them.

When trying to subtract two numbers(coarse example) that had been integrated over an infinite range, you do not know their limiting values, hence you cannot subtract them.


----------



## mediator (Jul 2, 2011)

@MHG : Mathematical fallacy

For dealing with infinity, you need to have a pretty strong visualization to get some vague idea, but at the same time you cannot visualize infinity.

y=e^x is a theoretical formula. Not everything in the world is based on theoretical formula. Earth seems to be "flat" from a lower frame of awareness or consciousness, but "round" from a higher frame of awareness. Similarly, you can visualize y=e^x till it is within limits. On the graph, if "1cm represents 1 km" (i.e visualization), then y=e^x may look like a straight line. If you put x=infinity, then y becomes infinity. You may still see a curve depending upon your frame of reference, but how sure can you be without the use of formula that it is still a curve? Even with the formula..

y=e, when x=1, i.e y!=x
y=e^2 when x=2 i.e y!=x
y=infinty when x=infinty i.e y becomes equal to x now (?) and the formula breaks from its consistency (?). 

You can deduce the formula of the graph, i.e reverse, if you are given the graph within limits. But you cannot when infinity comes into the picture. You cannot know if its a square, circle or a line then. 

y -> infinity only means that the variable is "approaching/tends to" infinity. It doesn't mean that it is infinity! Ponder over it and you might become a philosopher. In deep state of meditation (with eyes closed), you may experience that infinite. You cannot know where that blank starts or its depth. Ironically, you will realize that it is also a state of "nothingness" or emptiness! That emptiness may manifest into a thought and that thought into a dream.....well I got carried away


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 2, 2011)

tkin said:


> Going by your example lets say after infinite years you want to know their age difference, you do not know their age difference from start, neither do they(forgot), now can you calculate it?



Nope. Which is why I said you can handle infinite values _in certain situations where you know their origins and you are able to obtain a finite value using a relation between the two infinite values_

Meaning anything divided by infinity is ZERO. But sometimes, there come places in mathematics where infinity gets reduced to a finite value. Here we can solve.



> As far you and them are concerned both of them had lived for an eternity and you don't know how 'old' they exactly are, so you can no differentiate them.
> 
> When trying to subtract two numbers(coarse example) that had been integrated over an infinite range, you do not know their limiting values, hence you cannot subtract them.




Lemme give you another picture. Take two random infinite numbers. Their difference is indeterminate because we don't know what is the value by which the two differ.

But sometimes you DO know how the numbers originated. This happens in many of the common problems you encounter when making mathematical calculations. In these places, there are well defined procedures to solve the problem.

I'm not trying to say infinity is solvable, so your point holds true. But sometimes problems where you encounter terms tending to infinity there occur situations where you can rearrange stuff so that you don't get infinity anymore.



mediator said:


> @MHG : Mathematical fallacy
> 
> For dealing with infinity, you need to have a pretty strong visualization to get some vague idea, but at the same time you cannot visualize infinity.
> 
> ...



most of your reply is above.
as I said, your statements are correct. I only provided a solution for a small subset of infinity problems where infinity is really not infinity which is the case with many situations!



> y -> infinity only means that the variable is "approaching/tends to" infinity. It doesn't mean that it is infinity! Ponder over it and you might become a philosopher. In deep state of meditation (with eyes closed), you may experience that infinite. You cannot know where that blank starts or its depth. Ironically, you will realize that it is also a state of "nothingness" or emptiness! That emptiness may manifest into a thought and that thought into a dream.....well I got carried away


----------



## paul.soumyabrata (Jul 2, 2011)

See, all this BS, is really candy for the ear. See there are thousand mathematicians, there in the planet, who are all pondering over numbers, and infact dedicated their lives to number. People, you may seem to know something such as Limit. The mathematical equations, given previously, actually all do not obey the consistency and existence, so it is not solvable. So if you cannot solve it, it is not possible to evaluate it and get a finite result.


----------



## Neuron (Jul 2, 2011)

What i think is that there will never be an answer to operations like division by zero .Since these operations if we take in the practical sense are impossible.

For example 8 / 2 can be physically represented as dividing 8 apples among 2 persons.Its answer 4 is actually number of apples each person has at the end of the process of division.

Now when considering 8 / 0,it means that we are trying to divide 8 apples among 0 persons.And the answer we are searching for is the no. of apples possessed by those 0 persons at the end of division.Now this is totally impossible.
By '8 / 0'ing we are simply trying to do something that is senseless.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jul 2, 2011)

So by your logic what sense does 8/2.1 mean?


----------



## sygeek (Jul 2, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> So by your logic what sense does 8/2.1 mean?


8 / 2.1 = 3.80952381

_courtesy, google_


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jul 2, 2011)

sygeek said:


> 8 / 2.1 = 3.80952381
> 
> _courtesy, google_



Care to read the context


----------



## sygeek (Jul 2, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> Care to read the context


nope, just saying.


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jul 2, 2011)

sygeek said:


> nope, just saying.



you're an idiot.






















just saying


----------



## sygeek (Jul 2, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> you're an idiot.


Yeah, right, and look who got the thread offtopic, smartass?


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jul 2, 2011)

sygeek said:


> Yeah, right, and look who got the thread offtopic, smartass?



You .


----------



## sygeek (Jul 2, 2011)

> Yeah, right, and look who got the thread offtopic, *smartass*?





Liverpool_fan said:


> You


----------



## Vyom (Jul 2, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> So by your logic what sense does 8/2.1 mean?



It means dividing 8 apples between 2.1 men. Don't ask me, who was 0.1 men.
But this can be done: 8.1/2, which would mean, dividing 8.1 apples in 2 men.


----------



## sygeek (Jul 2, 2011)

vineet369 said:


> It means dividing 8 apples between 2.1 men. Don't ask me, who was 0.1 men.
> But this can be done: 8.1/2, which would mean, *dividing 8.1 apples in 2 men*.


Should be, by 2 men


----------



## Liverpool_fan (Jul 2, 2011)

vineet369 said:


> It means dividing 8 apples between 2.1 men. Don't ask me, who was 0.1 men.
> But this can be done: 8.1/2, which would mean, dividing 8.1 apples in 2 men.



What I questioned was that the trivial divison definiton only applies to natural numbers. Heck you can't even define 0/x (x!=0) by that definition, divide "nothing" by 4?
Anyway x/0 (x!=0) is undefined simply because there's no number multiplied by 0 to get x. As for 0/0, some mathematicians did define it as zero but that's not accepted in modern mathematics.


----------



## Neuron (Jul 2, 2011)

Liverpool_fan said:


> So by your logic what sense does 8/2.1 mean?



8 / 2.1 is actually 80/21 



vineet369 said:


> It means dividing 8 apples between 2.1 men. Don't ask me, who was 0.1 men.
> But this can be done: 8.1/2, which would mean, dividing 8.1 apples in 2 men.



Similarly 8.1/2 = 81/20


----------



## Anish (Jul 2, 2011)

May be he wrote that cr@p targeted at forums! To make his name known to everyone. Sincerely, I am still struggling on calculus!
But dividing by zero will give a value means, I would have got top class in my maths subject
Surely this article is a !@~~#$%~~ (Encrypted with blowfish)


----------



## mrintech (Jul 2, 2011)

sygeek said:


> 0/0 = 0/0 <=> Nothing/nothing = nothing/nothing
> 
> Nothing is nothing, thus it doesn't make sense to divide it, the answer thus is nothing (on both the sides).
> 
> ...


I just killed myself


----------



## thetechfreak (Jul 3, 2011)

Has any one actually bought the book? 
Really want to know how (un)successful it is?


----------



## Vyom (Jul 3, 2011)

^^ Maybe you can buy one, since you are so interested!!


----------



## KDroid (Jul 3, 2011)

The book itself is a loot. Rs. 250 for just 18 pages of S#!T !! huh!


----------



## eggman (Jul 3, 2011)

He has applied his own formula to his book..

Finite (or infinite?) amount of crap  / content = 18 (pages)

where content = 0

xD


----------



## nisargshah95 (Jul 4, 2011)

If he was so interested and keen, he would have sold that book for free! I haven't seen such big news about it yet, not even on CBSE site or anything...


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 4, 2011)

Just wanted to point out: Normal research papers are published in acclaimed journals. Now CBSE...



Spoiler



Isn't CBSE the same body who make students mug up random formulae without explaining their meanings, mug up 200 reactions without properly explaining how they happen, discuss physics like its history and publish some of the most crappiest textbooks ever that atleast 25% of Indian school students have to "study" (read: mug) every year ? And whose question papers can be solved if students have solved/mugged every question/answer in the prescribed textbook and previous 10 years papers, like robots ? Aren't they the organization who conduct the AIEEE which sends students to Computer Science Engineering courses without making them solve a logic/programming paper and instead relies on how well they do in chemistry ?


----------



## thetechfreak (Jul 4, 2011)

We need changes in our systems. The current scenarion is very bad


----------



## Extreme Gamer (Jul 4, 2011)

MetalheadGautham said:


> Just wanted to point out: Normal research papers are published in acclaimed journals. Now CBSE...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


how much better is CISCE vs CBSE?

other than that they allow scientific calculators.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 4, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:


> how much better is CISCE vs CBSE?
> 
> other than that they allow scientific calculators.



No idea sorry! Long time since I've been to school


----------



## thetechfreak (Jul 5, 2011)

Extreme Gamer said:
			
		

> other than that they allow scientific
> calculators.


 Thats all one needs to get good marks   .

Btw, CBSE has launced has a CCE scheme which again I am not a big fan off


----------



## SlashDK (Jul 5, 2011)

CCE = CRAP^infinity


----------



## Extreme Gamer (Jul 5, 2011)

@thetechfreak: That calculator is only for crazy divisions and verification in numericals and maths problems.

who will do the cumbersome calculation to convert the value of a tangent into degrees for a vector sum?

or lok at cases where you get divisions similar to pi. In maths you have to do the problems with all  the steps. it only helps in things like unitary method, x^n etc.


----------



## KDroid (Jul 6, 2011)

@Cybertonic: I totally agree.. It's completely crap! BS!


----------

