ozodigboo:

So, what if a = 10 and b = 10 ?

................
to apply the difference of two squares,the square of a and b has to be different. a cannot be equal to b.
In other words the diff btw the square of one number and a different number not the same number.

soe:
are you alright??

-b^2 means -b x -b ? Like seriously

Gush i don't even know what to say again.

Listen

(-b)^2 is different from -b^2

(-b)^2. Means -b x -b
While
-b^2 means -1 x b x b. Meaning. -(b^2)

Sad for u

Excellent, Soe. Teach them

abegi,ahhh,i dont have to be a mathematician to understand that he is right..

if our ancestors believed that 0 is a number too..0 is starting of numbers,then 0=1...if 0=1,then 0+0=2..

its simpel reasoning...

Im happy to see some comments. There are right-thinking mathematicians in the house.

Brilliant try @ OP but there are so many rules guiding mathematics and algebra. Unlike some disciplines where u can rely wholly on personal opinion and simple logic to prove points, you have to follow proven rules and scientific theories when dealing with scientific problems.

The law of the difference of two squares is explicit. "....the difference between one squared number and another squared number...."

The difference between two numbers having the same value is always zero.

God!

the conventional answer 0/0= infinity is equally right as 0/0 can be proved to even be 3,4,5,6.........etc

This guy is so right and needs commendation. @ the others trying hard to disprove him, what he did is (10)^2 and not (-10)^2 so think well before u argue.

tsdarkside:


and you are a waste of time...

btw...whats the meaning of dullard..

THUNDER FIRE YOUR WHITE-MIND....

i dont understand mathematics...the only thing i know from history is,our ancestors believe that 0 is a number too...

ofcourse 0 is a number. No mathematician will tell you 0 is not a number.

We have another expression referred to as NaN. That means 'Not a Number'. For example log of any negative number e.g log(-3) = NaN.

Zero is a member of the real number set. It is very much a number and signifies the weight of the base on which we are working with.

How does this mathematical solution stop my pastor from collecting offering today?

This is why i hate maths. Its pure madness.

As bad as I am in maths, i knew from the third line that you're wrong. . . So wrong that only idle hands like mine will comment

Dividing any number by zero (0) will give infinity. So, mathematically it is wrong to say 0/0 = 0

soe:
ofcourse 0 is a number. No mathematician will tell you 0 is not a number.

We have another expression referred to as NaN. That means 'Not a Number'. For example log of any negative number e.g log(-3) = NaN.

Zero is a member of the real number set. It is very much a number and signifies the weight of the base on which we are working with.

WHAT THE HELL,ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??

THUNDER FIRE YOU.....

Justfollowit:
God!

In mathematics 0/0 has no finite solution.

Let 'x' be a number number

X/0 = infinity

0/X = zero

X/X, where x is zero could have multiple answers,

It can be proven to be equal zero, infinity, one, two and many other answers.

So mathematical, 0/0 has no finite solution

cupid1:
He started failing it from the point where he struck out 10 and -10,the 10 on top is supposed to equate to -1 when divided by -1 which when put into the equation, will give you 19/10.
And secondly, you cant stricke out numbers that way. They are in brackets in their own different equations i.e an equation in an equation.
So my point is, the person who provided this so called 'proof' is a dullard

Its just a submission. You don't need to call him names. I think its a good reasoning start for any JSS student to think that way. Its a good sign. Keep trying bro.

tsdarkside:


WHAT THE HELL,ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT??

THUNDER FIRE YOU.....

what is making my guy vex this much ?? Pls send me your phone number

The point were he expanded 10^2 - 10^2 = (10+10)(10-10) is actually wrong. Though they both give zero, the RHS is a manipulation to arrive at a Desired result. The LHS is 100-100 while the RHS is 200-200. They will both give zero. But the latter is more like 2(100-100), which is divided by (100-100). This 2 could also be replaced by 3,4,5 etc, to proved that 0/0=3,4,5 etc. That is why in maths division by zero is an error.


So he ain't correct.

As an A1 maths in O levels this mathematical equation breaks mathemetical rules

First, you don't apply the mathematical rules for working with unknowns to knowns, which is what he has done

Secondly if you do this, then I can prove that 0÷3± 8 sef

0/0 is not equal to 1
Because in logical terms it becomes a fallacy,
If you have nothing and if you divide that nothing among none,then each one gets 1,
Hence the very definition of division fails here.

jonaji:
Very Creative I tell you.... So students in the house.... You can use it to challenge ur teachers

b ryte bck I wana drink my hot tea 1st.

d prove is correct. I de hail ooo bros

The ans could be any number
Because....

If you multiply you and with the denominator at the left hand side you get zero

0/0=2
0 = 0*2 =0

OP you are Good

wonda26:

10^2 - 10^2 = (10 + 10)(10-10) is very correct.

In mathematics, it is called 'Difference of two squares'


If you doubt, try simplifying the right hand side of the equation

Lol. Yes it is called 'difference of two squares'. The rule is ONLY applied in Mathematics when the squared numbered are different which brought about the name in the first place otherwise it is zero using same number. lol. So the whole equation ends in zero. But then again, any fraction wherein you have a number divided by 0 is called undefined fraction. How do I know? I am a lecturer.

The logic behind the proof is flawed from the beginning, even if the OP is correct, which he is not, you can't successfully apply that logic to all numbers from 0 - 9...It won't hold water...


So no matter how you look at it, the logic is flawed...IMO

I think 1 is a better answer though the process is creative. rule of whatever they call it now says:
1) any number divided by zero equals infinity
2) any number divided by itself is equal to 1.
so, which one applys?

Deleted

Jumbledwords:
Lol, everything was okay till he/she decided to expand 10^2 - 10^2

mathematically, the expansion is right.

This is not something new, the proning is correct but mathematically unacceptable! The reason why division by 0 is not allowed is because you can actually manipulate the result to give you any number you like (Not unique). Tha's why didvision by 0 is called indefinate (infinity = ∞)

Tinkybabe:

True!

10(1+1)/10(1+1)

=2/2 = 1


I guess, we can prove and disprove mathematics theories as much as we want which shows that maths is not finite.


I admire the guy 's reasoning ability but he flawed when he didn't apply the same mode of expansion to the numerator and the denominator.
1 is a better answer

He was to prove that 0/0 =2 not 1, so he is correct!

cupid1:
He started failing it from the point where he struck out 10 and -10,the 10 on top is supposed to equate to -1 when divided by -1 which when put into the equation, will give you 19/10.

Mathematically, he made no mistakes. Scientifically, the proposal is wrong.

emekachimek:


But his fractionalization was wrong: 100-100 is never 10^2 - 10^2 because -100 is NOT equal to -10^2. -10^2 = +100.

He is right there is -10^2 is equal to -100