Why isn't 0/0 defined? Isn't it just equal to one?

Why isn't 0/0 defined? Isn't it just equal to one?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(mathematics)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_(mathematics)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_theory
wolframalpha.com/input/?i=plot[1/x]
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

why not just make a new symbol for 1/0. that's what they did with the negative square root and it turned out pretty good.

...

Since 1+0+1+0+1... is equal to 1/2
Wouldn't it stand to reason that 1/0 is equal to 0 ? Since it is the average of infinity and negative infinity.

This has been done in various ways. There are a lot of choices you have to make that lead in different directions. You must sacrifice associative multiplication to go down these paths, however.

Not sure if you're trolling but depending on how one approached 0/0 you can get different results. If the numerator approaches 0 faster than the denominator then it will be 0. If the reverse of that, infinity. If the rates are comparable it can be literally any real number.

>Blue Chiyo
OHSHIT
I miss those threads though.

Oh yeah I remember some faggot from here that actually said something like "complicated numbers" that was 1/0.
Shitter made me laugh for the whole day with this autism drawings

...

Assume 0/0=1
Then 2*0/0 = 1
So 2 = 0/0*1 = 1

Stupid rulings like this are why I don't play 5th.