Notices
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By epidecus

Thread: 0 problem

  1. #1 0 problem 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    So if we multipy 0 and 0 some say we don't get anything we get a 0 but if we multipy nothing with nothing i guess we get something what do you think i am only 12 so this is my idea.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    I like your curiosity! I am just having a little trouble understanding. Zero multiplied by zero is zero. What are you trying to say after this?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    Well you have nothing and you have nothing so nothing plus nothing should make something.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    You can only really multiply numbers. "Nothing times nothing" does not equal something. If you have two fields of grass, and each of them have no sheep, then you have no sheep.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    Guess your right but il still think about if there might be something in my theory also.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Dude, 0+0=0.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    But look at it this way you have nothing and you fuse it with nothing and it should make something even if that something is nothing actully did you look at it that way?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    No. 0+0=0. It doesn't matter that you are adding them. The act of addition doesn't make 0+0=1!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Hello Mateja78,

    I'm glad you're curious about math! Think of it this way... When we multiply a number by zero, we are subtracting that number from itself. This is from the iterative definition for multiplication. So what happens when you take nothing away from nothing? You still have nothing!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    I sead that something could still be 0 or nothing
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    Well i guess it is answerd but wait if you take something from nothing won't that make a negative number than?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    Hello Mateja78,

    I'm glad you're curious about math! Think of it this way... When we multiply a number by zero, we are subtracting that number from itself. This is from the iterative definition for multiplication. So what happens when you take nothing away from nothing? You still have nothing!
    What?!?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Belgrade,Serbia
    Posts
    64
    Well i guess 0*0 is just 0 thanks for your time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Mateja78 View Post
    Well i guess 0*0 is just 0 thanks for your time.
    No problem, I like your interest!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    What?!?
    Not sure if you really care, but... A number times zero is the same thing as that number minus itself. Actually, it's defined that way. So 0x0 is the same thing as 0-0.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by Mateja78 View Post
    Well i guess it is answerd but wait if you take something from nothing won't that make a negative number than?
    Watch out. You can't always think of numbers as "nothing" and "something". I used it to help explain it in your terms, but you have to be careful. We must use the proper, precise terms or else all we'll get is a bunch of confusion. The big problem here is whether or not "something" is positive or negative. Unless you specify, or just use the proper terms, we'll have no idea what you mean.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    What?!?
    Not sure if you really care, but... A number times zero is the same thing as that number minus itself. Actually, it's defined that way. So 0x0 is the same thing as 0-0.
    No. A number subtracted from itself is additive inverse. A number multiplied by zero is the multiplicative property of zero. You can think of multiplying by zero that way, but it isn't defined that way. The multiplicative property of zero says that anything times zero is equal to zero.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Mateja78 View Post
    Well i guess it is answerd but wait if you take something from nothing won't that make a negative number than?
    Yes. For example:

    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Like Billy Preston said, nothing from nothing leaves nothing.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    A number subtracted from itself is additive inverse.
    No. You're saying a number subtracted from itself, or , is the additive inverse of that number, or . So 5 - 5 = -5?

    You can think of multiplying by zero that way, but it isn't defined that way. The multiplicative property of zero says that anything times zero is equal to zero.
    Yes. The multiplicative property. You just can't properly call it a definition because it's stated as a property based on more basic reasoning. This reasoning being that integer multiplication in the iterative definition is defined as repeated addition/subtraction:

    ...





    ...
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    "Well i guess it is answerd but wait if you take something from nothing won't that make a negative number than?"

    Yes. For example:

    Sorry to crash on you again guymillion :P, but I didn't really specify my point earlier with Mateja. Again, precise and proper mathematical terms. Is that "something" positive or negative? If positive, then taking that "something" from the "nothing" (zero) will result in a negative. But then if it's negative, well, you get the point. Also, some can take "something" to include zero. Zero is an actual number and represents a set just like every other number. So as you can see, the whole thing is very ambiguous and should be avoided altogether, which is my point to Mateja.
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    So as you can see, the whole thing is very ambiguous and should be avoided altogether, which is my point to Mateja.
    Not quite sure what you mean by that, or how you are "crashing on me."

    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    No. You're saying a number subtracted from itself, or , is the additive inverse of that number, or . So 5 - 5 = -5?
    No, although I can see what you are saying. For example, is the inverse of . However, the act of adding them together is additive inverse or . It's the same as .

    Additive inverse - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
    Definition of Additive Inverse
    Cool math Pre-Algebra Help Lessons: Properties - The Additive Inverse Property

    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    ...





    ...
    I can see how this would be fine, but you have still failed to show me a reference that says this.

    Edit:
    I now agree with your thinking mostly. This part is what convinced me:

    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    ...





    ...


    It was next to this picture:
    2000px-Multiply_4_bags_3_marbles.jpg

    This is something I found, and it helped me see what you were saying. I guess I was just against the idea because I couldn't understand your first post. However, with regards to zero, additive inverse and multiplicative property of zero were basically saying the same thing, so I guess I wasn't too off. I got the stuff from wikipedia, just to cite my sources.
    Last edited by guymillion; August 11th, 2012 at 07:52 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion
    This is something I found, and it helped me see what you were saying. I guess I was just against the idea because I couldn't understand your first post. However, with regards to zero, additive inverse and multiplicative property of zero were basically saying the same thing, so I guess I wasn't too off. I got the stuff from wikipedia, just to cite my sources.
    No worries At least you had the right idea. This really is just basic math (ignoring the complications of advanced algebra. don't yell at me mathematicians)... basic math with confusing terminology. Here's a short (albeit boring) outline explaining the iteration concept if any reader's are still confused. Questions are welcome.

    "Level 1"
    Integer addition : It's complicated
    (inverse of addition is subtraction)

    "Level 2"
    Integer multiplication : Iterated addition/subtraction
    (inverse of multiplication is division)

    "Level 3"
    Integer exponentiation (for an arbitrary base) : Iterated multiplication/division
    (inverses of exponentiation are roots and logarithms)

    After exponentiation is tetration ("level 4" iterated exponentiation/rooting), and it keeps going. I don't see a practical application of these higher operations anywhere outside the pure mathematics so that's probably why they're not very well known. A look at the wiki's is encouraged; interesting stuff.
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    No worries At least you had the right idea.


    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    This really is just basic math
    Yeah, no, I get that.

    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    "Level 1"
    Integer addition : It's complicated
    (inverse of addition is subtraction)

    "Level 2"
    Integer multiplication : Iterated addition/subtraction
    (inverse of multiplication is division)

    "Level 3"
    Integer exponentiation (for an arbitrary base) : Iterated multiplication/division
    (inverses of exponentiation are roots and logarithms)
    Yup. Fairly straightforward:

    1. Addition

    2. Multiplication (addition multiple times)

    3. Exponents (multiplication multiple times)

    Right?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epidecus View Post
    "Level 1"
    Integer addition : It's complicated
    (inverse of addition is subtraction)

    "Level 2"
    Integer multiplication : Iterated addition/subtraction
    (inverse of multiplication is division)

    "Level 3"
    Integer exponentiation (for an arbitrary base) : Iterated multiplication/division
    (inverses of exponentiation are roots and logarithms)
    Yup. Fairly straightforward:

    1. Addition

    2. Multiplication (addition multiple times)

    3. Exponents (multiplication multiple times)

    Right?
    Partially. If you're introducing elementary school kids to multiplication, it's good to just say "repeated addition" or "fancy adding". This only applies when you're multiplying by the natural numbers 2 or greater. What happens when you multiply by 1? Or zero? Or a negative? The students probably haven't gotten into integers and all the rules involving negatives, so that's all they have to work with (I'm sure the teacher will tell them multiplying by 1 is the same and multiplying by zero is zero just because) But since we're extending this to all integers, we can safely say...

    ... multiplying by an integer of 2 or greater involves repeated addition
    ... multiplying by an integer of 0 or less involves repeated subtraction
    ... multiplying by 1 just leaves the number the same (which is why 1 is the multiplicative identity)

    The same thing goes for exponents. If you square a number, or raise it to the power of 2, you're multiplying it by itself. And you know the pattern going up from there. You may know the power of 1 just leaves the base the same, and the power of 0 always equals 1, maybe you were taught that, just because.

    Here's a more extensive outline (sorry for the long, boring stuff. bear with me)...

    ONE:
    Integer Addition : Again, Complicated
    (iterated zeration?)
    The inverse of addition is subtraction.

    TWO:
    Integer Multiplication : Based off addition and subtraction
    ...





    ...
    The pattern continues in both directions and applies to all integers.
    The inverse of multiplication is division.

    THREE:
    Exponentiation (where the base is arbitrary and the power is an integer) : Based off multiplication and division
    ...





    ...
    The pattern continues in both directions and applies to all integers
    The inverse of exponentiation with respect to the base is rooting.
    The inverse with respect to the power is the logarithm.

    FOUR:
    Tetration : Follows the same pattern of iteration
    ---
    [ For integer hyper-powers of 2 or greater : iterated exponentiation
    For a hyper-power of 1 : identitive
    For integer hyper-powers of 0 or less : iterated rooting ]
    ---
    The pattern continues in both directions and applies to all integers.
    The inverse with respect to the hyper-power is super-rooting (e.g. super-square root)
    The inverse with respect to the base is the super-logarithm (looks like "slog(x)")


    The sequence can be extended infinitely. What follows is usually called pentation (inverses: penta-root and penta-logarithm) and so on. Interesting and confusing stuff I have to say!
    guymillion likes this.
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Average Human guymillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    187
    Nice post! Yeah, I should have mentioned that. I was just sort of ignoring negatives and division and stuff like that.

    Interesting zeration post. I understand most of it, but it sure is weird. For example:



    Where is the operation for zeration. However, I don't really understand how to actually do the operation with numbers. It also doesn't sound as if many people accept its idea.
    Last edited by guymillion; August 11th, 2012 at 12:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    Quote Originally Posted by guymillion View Post
    Nice post!
    Thanks! I'm not an expert, but this subject really interests me so I contribute what I can.

    Interesting zeration post. I understand most of it, but it sure is weird. For example:



    Where is the operation for zeration. However, I don't really understand how to actually do the operation with numbers. It also doesn't sound as if many people accept its idea.
    Yeah, zeration sure is something special. I can see why it's so controversial. It just opens up a flood of questions. So far, the concept doesn't seem applicable at all, like it's purely abstract. And you're right. The idea is not very popular. Most of the people interested in stuff like fractals, and infinities, and higher dimensions will likely never hear of zeration. Seeing that it is so abstract, inapplicable, and unformulated leaves it with barely any serious attention.

    Who knows? Maybe in the future it might become part of standard and established mathematics. If that happens, imagine the unorthodox applications it's capable of and the weird formulation required to extend it to the complex numbers. Maybe ii = pi! (as a fun speculative joke)
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    493
    Maybe the intuition here is that zero means you dont do something
    then zero times zero might mean that you dont dont do something...
    which seems the same as doing something.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. A problem that's way beyond me!
    By m84uily in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 17th, 2011, 07:03 PM
  2. On a Problem
    By Liongold in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: October 18th, 2010, 03:03 PM
  3. A problem with F=ma
    By Waveman28 in forum Physics
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: March 17th, 2009, 12:45 PM
  4. Calculus II Problem - some bridge problem!!
    By jgezau in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2008, 08:41 PM
  5. Another problem...
    By thyristor in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 9th, 2008, 03:24 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •