20200623, 16:07  #45  
Jun 2020
29 Posts 
Quote:


20200623, 16:09  #46  
Jun 2020
29 Posts 
Quote:


20200623, 16:55  #47 
Aug 2006
2×2,969 Posts 
It's hard for me to believe we're five pages in and you still haven't defined your operation.
You have a function  not division, but your new take on it  which takes two arguments and returns a third. Let's call it BillyB(x, y) = z. For which pairs of x and y is BillyB(x, y) defined? When BillyB(x, y) is defined, how can BillyB(x, y) = z be computed? Are there some pairs x and y for which BillyB(x, y) = x/y or BillyB(x, y+1) = x/y? 
20200623, 17:37  #48 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
DB0_{16} Posts 

20200623, 18:25  #49  
Jun 2020
29 Posts 
Quote:


20200623, 18:26  #50  
Jun 2020
29_{10} Posts 
Quote:


20200623, 18:26  #51  
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
3×2,963 Posts 
Quote:
Some dude that likely lives in rural 'merica at the end of a gravel road thinks he found something new with regards to basic math. It has been known for ~1500 years that division by zero is absurd. 

20200623, 19:30  #52 
Jun 2020
29 Posts 
Why are you so offended by this? And no, you have me all wrong. How would anything new be created if it weren’t for new ideas?

20200623, 19:47  #53  
Bamboozled!
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across
3^{2}·11·103 Posts 
Quote:
2) I agree wholeheartedly. That said, please define the function which has been called "BillyB". Here is a first take, based on what I have read so far. I am very far from infallible so my definition may be completely wrong. Let x and y be real numbers. BillyB(x, y) = x/y for all x, y where x and y are both nonzero. BillyB(x,0) = 1 for all x not equal to zero. At the moment I have no idea of the value of the only remaining case, viz BillyB(0,0). Please enlighten me. This is especially true for the third case, "0/0". Last fiddled with by xilman on 20200623 at 19:54 Reason: Remove otiose comma 

20200623, 20:48  #54  
"Ben"
Feb 2007
3,343 Posts 
Quote:
[edit] but that assumes some definitions... namely that x is the quantity or size of a cuttable object and y is the number of times to cut it into equal pieces. Then BillyB(x,y) = x / (y+1). Physically you can only cut something zero or more times so the domain of the function is >= 0. So, by that definition, there is no dividing by zero possible, by the everyday/ordinary definition of "divide". BillyB is not a division operation but some kind of splitting operation. [editedit] I suppose that must mean that x, y are in . The guess at a definition doesn't work otherwise.... Last fiddled with by bsquared on 20200623 at 21:06 

20200623, 23:08  #55  
Jun 2020
29 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Prime number thought experiment  MooMoo2  Lounge  59  20180102 18:37 
Just a thought of Quark numbers.  SarK0Y  Miscellaneous Math  44  20111107 18:01 
A real GIMPS math thought  davieddy  Math  45  20110606 01:58 
I thought I found another one.....  schickel  Aliquot Sequences  0  20110221 03:52 
MPrime: K7 has 64KB of L1 cache... but I thought it had 128K!  optim  Hardware  2  20040710 19:59 