October 11th, 2017, 03:10 PM  #11  
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  Quote:
Your post is clearly "flaming" and against the rules. If you really wish to discuss this with me, you may begin by leaving polite replies.  
October 11th, 2017, 03:11 PM  #12 
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  
October 11th, 2017, 05:58 PM  #13  
Senior Member Joined: Sep 2015 From: Southern California, USA Posts: 1,488 Thanks: 749  Quote:
Please provide a link to said rules so we all can read them.  
October 11th, 2017, 06:29 PM  #14  
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  Quote:
Lol...is that so...perhaps I should have clarified...it is against my personal rules. Should you wish to discuss the idea as opposed to me.... you may begin by posting a polite reply regarding the idea ...  
October 11th, 2017, 06:31 PM  #15 
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,564 Thanks: 377  If 0 times 1 is sometimes 1 and sometimes 0, how can you base a rational system of computation on that?

October 11th, 2017, 06:36 PM  #16  
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  Quote:
If a 1 is paired with a 1 that 1 is 1 An alternative idea is to consider Z1=multiplicative property of 0 Z2=multiplicative identity property of 1 In this way no table is necessary. Allowing that only one property at a time may be used for zero ...either z1 or z2 Thank you I think I may have misunderstood your last question. If I can show that there is a unique solution for each "product" of the expression ( A x 0 )...then rationality still exists Last edited by Conway51; October 11th, 2017 at 07:09 PM.  
October 12th, 2017, 07:48 AM  #17 
Senior Member Joined: Sep 2016 From: USA Posts: 165 Thanks: 72 Math Focus: Dynamical systems, analytic function theory, numerics 
Once again Conway the problem is that if you are able to define any method for inverting 0 then you are not working in a field. This is a fact which is unavoidable. I still can't follow what you are describing for multiplication by 0 but I would bet the rent that your multiplication and addition operations are one of the following: 1. not well defined 2. not commutative 3. not distributive These 3 properties are far more important than being able to divide by 0. If you still don't understand, please specify the following so I can show you an example which violates 1,2, or 3. Using your system please fill in the following values: $1 \times 2 = ?$ $2 \times 1 = ?$ $1 \times 0 = ?$ $0 \times 1 = ?$ $0 \times 2 = ?$ $2 \times 0 = ?$ 
October 12th, 2017, 10:17 AM  #18  
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  Quote:
SDK Perhaps because you are still having trouble understanding me, is the reason why you do not understand yet why this is valid in a field. I can guarantee you that commutative and distributive properties exist with out change. In fact.... Field Axioms  from Wolfram MathWorld I have used this link many times........ I shall fill in the values as you have requested...perhaps then we will begin to communicate better... 1 x 2 = 2 2 x 1 = 2 1 x 0 = 0 (if and only if 0 is z1) 0 x 1 = 0 (if and only if 0 is z1) 0 x 2 = 0 (if and only if 0 is z1) 2 x 0 = 0 (if and only if 0 is z1 now... 1 x 0 = 1 (if and only if 0 is z2) 0 x 1 = 1 (if and only if 0 is z2) 2 x 0 = 2 (if and only if 0 is z2) 0 x 2 = 2 (if and only if 0 is z1) I truly hope we are making progress in our communication.... I still insist that your issues is with multiplicative inverses. You seemed very concerned about division and multiplication being "inverse" properties...."except by zero".........I can show that they are by "zero"...should you wish we can start doing the math with fractions..... Now I ask you to do some homework...as you have asked me... use the original table...follow the steps....perform the following expressions... A x B = where A and B =/=0 A x B = where A and B = 0 A x B = where only A or B = 0 Thank you  
October 12th, 2017, 11:41 AM  #19  
Senior Member Joined: Sep 2016 From: USA Posts: 165 Thanks: 72 Math Focus: Dynamical systems, analytic function theory, numerics  Quote:
\[ 1 = x\cdot 0 = x\cdot (11) = x  x = 0 \] which I hope you agree is a problem. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
 
October 12th, 2017, 02:03 PM  #20  
Member Joined: Aug 2012 Posts: 51 Thanks: 0  Quote:
SDK 0 raised to any negative number is undefined. Therefore (x) in your equation is equal to "undefined". Therefore your equations really are nonsense. https://math.stackexchange.com/quest...equalinfinity http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55594.html However I do see what you were trying to explain to me (I think). What I am trying to explain to you is this... (x * 0 = 0 ) if and only if 0 is "chosen" as z1 You chose to use zero as z2 in your equation. Therefore your "previous" equation would yield a false sum.....hence your argument....but it would only do so if I chose 0 as z2 otherwise (A * 0 =/= A) BY DEFENITION.... however...you may "chose" to use zero as z2 (x * 0 = x ) so... if I use 0 as z1 then... x * 0 = 0 therefore 0 = x * 0 = x(11)= xx = 0 You seem to be taking issue that I can "chose" the product of the expression ( A * 0 ) to fit my arguments....I can... You claim that this is what makes it "ill defined" and inconsistent. If... however I can show a unique solution for both "products" then there is NO inconsistency. Further the unique solutions for both "products" is exactly what makes these definitions "well" defined. Thank you very much for your sincere replies. Last edited by Conway51; October 12th, 2017 at 02:15 PM.  

Tags 
peer, request, review 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Peer checking on my derivative answers  jinh0o  Calculus  7  April 12th, 2016 03:27 PM 
Looking for tutor or peer  Isla232  Math  3  October 15th, 2015 02:58 PM 
compound in a Peer 2 peer loan program  apgomes  Linear Algebra  0  September 10th, 2015 01:38 AM 
Peer 2 peer lending  wwf10  Economics  1  July 21st, 2015 02:14 PM 