Hello, i have a few questions regarding infinity, which i'd like to discuss with you all.

- Is \( \frac{1}{0} = \infty \)
- Is \( \frac{1}{\infty} = 0 \)
- Is \( \tan90^\circ = \pm\infty \)
- Is \( \log_x0 = -\infty \)

All my teachers tell me that the above expressions are *undefined*, and so is \(\infty \) (undefined), and we cannot compare the two.

I understand that we cannot determine the exact value of the above expressions, but what is the problem of terming them as \(\infty \)?

On graphing these, we do notice that they approach infinity, so why say that they are undefined? You may say that infinity is a concept, and not an actual number, but then isn't everything a concept?

If the number 1 is defined, then what is its definition? 1? (circular proof) Every number is a concept, and I don't see how certain operations on them cannot lead to infinity, (another concept).

No vote yet

26 votes

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Easy Math Editor

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestHello friends, I got struck at question related to phi function in number theory. The question is as follows If \frac{n-1}{phi(n)} is a positive integer, then prove that no prime

`p`

is such that \frac{n}{p^2}.Log in to reply

HELLO

Log in to reply

SOME ONE HEIP ME

Log in to reply

SOME ONE HELP ME ANY ONE

Log in to reply

solve for x: sin^-1[sin(2x^2=4 by 1=x^2)] < pi -3

Log in to reply

Need to simplify: (((x+∛(2ax^2 )) (2a+∛4ax)^(-1)-1)/(∛x-∛2a)-(2a)^(-1/3) )^(-6)

Log in to reply

If we have f= 3,1,4,1,5,1,... find {f (n)}. please answer me,helppp

Log in to reply

A Ferris wheel can be modeled, in meters, by the equation, r = 12 sin θ. The wheel makes one full rotation in 60 seconds.

Log in to reply

how to solve dis problem? title" solving a second-order IVP" Y"-3y'+2y=e^-4t ;y(0)=1 ; y'(0)=5?

Log in to reply

need to answer to correct.

Log in to reply

i can't read your question,please clean cut

Log in to reply

Log in to reply

Water at 100°c is taken off the stove . In 5 minutes off the burner the temperature decreased to 85°c Given that the room temperature is 25°c and newtons law of cooling is followed find the temperature of the water in degrees Celsius after an additional 5 minutes

Log in to reply

How can direction of motion affect time ( i mean some particle is in future or past light cone ,something like that) If a clock is stationary and other is moving towards it and continues to pass by ,the stationery clock perceives the time differently ,plz explain ,as am getting same results in every situation

Log in to reply

square ABCD divided into 18 smaller square. 17 squares of the sides of length 1. ABCD square area Find.

Log in to reply

Integration of [e^(ax).ln(x)]

Log in to reply

Post this as a note. It will reach to more people that way.

Log in to reply

What is the probability that exactly one player gets all four aces if a randomly shuffled deck is dealt to four players?

Log in to reply

I have a doubt

0^n=0 Where n is any real number n^0=1

Where n is any real number

Then what is 0^0 ?

is it 0 or 1?

Log in to reply

There's actually a wiki on it: What is \(0^0\).You can check that out.

Log in to reply

I have a comment on one over zero: \(\frac{1}{0}=\infty\) Multiply both sides by zero to remove the fraction bit. You get 1=0

Log in to reply

We can show that any number is equal to any other number by setting \(\frac{1}{0}=\infty\)

Log in to reply

1) I will (partially) answer the first part. The is significant theory involved, that I'm not going into detail about. If you are interested, you can read up on set theory.

The concept of infinity is best expressed using set theory. Without having to assume the existence of 0 or 1, we know that there is the empty set \( \emptyset\), Furthermore, we can build more sets by taking the union of their elements, or taking the set of the set. We know that there is the set of the empty set \( \{ \emptyset \} \). We know that there is the set of the union of them empty set and the previous set. \( \{ \emptyset, \{ \emptyset \} \} \). So on and so forth.

We say that

2 representations are equal, if there is a bijection between them. For example, \( \{ \emptyset \} \) and \( \{ \{ \emptyset \} \} \)are equivalent. (Prove the following statement using the transitive property of bijections.) These representations form an equivalence relation, which means that it doesn't matter which choice of representations we use.This allows us to build up a concept of counting. We can let the a set of \(n\) elements represent the integer \(n\). In the first paragraph, we gave representations of 0, 1 and 2. Verify for yourself that taking the union of 2 sets is equal to taking the sum of the integers that they represent. What does taking the set of a set do to the integer? I.e. What is \( \{ (any set) \} \) equal to?

Any set that can be built up in this way (taking unions, and sets), is called a

finite set. Any (nonnegative) integer that is represented in this way isfinite.An

infinite setis a set that is not finite. Aninfinite numberis a number represented by an infinite set. It is not obvious that an infinite set exists, since it is defined "not something".You should show the following:

The set of natural numbers is an infinite set. Hint: To show this, show that it is not equivalent to any finite set. Hence, it is "not finite set".

The set of natural numbers is equivalent to the set of rational numbers

The set of natural numbers is not equivalent to the set of real numbers.

Log in to reply

1 Denote the set of natural numbers by N. Fix a natural number n. Denote the set whose n elements are indexed

xi, i = 1 to n, byXn. Consider the map F:Xn => N, F(xi) = i. Then n + 1 (and all higher natural numbers) cannot be in the range of F becauseXn has only the n elementsxi, i = 1 to n. That is, F cannot be onto. But then, N cannot be equivalent to any finite set because if the order of that finite set was n, the only maps from it into N are of the form F(p), where p is a map intoXn, mapping different elements of the arbitrarily chosen finite set onto differentxi. Therefore, N is an infinite set.2 Any rational number can be expressed in the form (a - b) / s, where a, b, and s are natural numbers. So if we could prove that some subset of N is equivalent to the set of ordered triples N^3, that N is equivalent to the set of rationals Q would follow. Denote the set of natural numbers divisible by no primes higher than 5 by V. Consider the map v: V => N^3, v(2^a 3^b 5^s) = (a, b, s). Because prime factorization in N (hence in V) is unique, v is one to one. We therefore have the cycle N => Q => N^3 => V => N, where

S1 =>S2 meansS1 is equivalent to a subset ofS2. As a side note, this logic easily extends to the fact that N is equivalent to the set of algebraic numbers A, which by definition is all complex numbers that satisfy polynomials of finite degree n, with coefficients in Q and with nth-power coefficient 1, except this time replace V with N itself (and use the fact that N is equivalent to Q).3 Cantor's diagonal argument is our main tool for proving that N cannot be equivalent to set of real numbers R. It's easier if we replaced R with E, where the members of E are precisely the real numbers between 0 and 1 inclusive. Consider the map r: N => E, defined as follows:

r(0) = 0.

a(0,0)a(0,1)a(0,2)a(0,3) ...r(1) = 0.

a(1,0)a(1,1)a(1,2)a(1,3) ...r(2) = 0.

a(2,0)a(2,1)a(2,2)a(2,3) ...r(3) = 0.

a(3,0)a(3,1)a(3,2)a(3,3) ...and so on. Now consider x = 0.

e0e1e2e3 ... whereei =a(i,i) + 5, 0 ≤ i ≤ 4,ei =a(i,i) - 5, 5 ≤ i ≤ 9.Now x cannot be in the range of r because if it was, each of the

ei would equal the respectivea(j,i) for some fixed j, and in particularej would equala(j,j) which it can't. Ergo, r cannot be onto. We can therefore conclude that N is not equivalent to E (and hence, to R).Log in to reply

Harshit,

There are numerous questions that you raise in this single discussion. In general, when you're asking for clarification, keeping things to a single question / query (and opening several discussions) could help ensure that you get proper replies to all of them.

I can classify the numerous questions that you raised in the following 4 broad categories:

1) What is infinity? Can we compare infinities? Can we do any arithmetic with infinities? What do those equations mean, if anything?

2) What concepts can be represented by another concept? For example, can the concept of 1 be represented by the number line? Can the concept of infinity be represented by the number line? Can the concept of pigeonhole principle be represented by the number line?

3) What is the definition of 1? How about 2, 3? How about 0? Is there a way to define it that isn't circular?

4) Why are some operations defined on some numbers, but not on others?

For the purposes of this discussion, let's keep it mainly to 1. If you're interested in the others, please open up another discussion topic for each of them.

Log in to reply

hi we dont no wht infinity is so we say that till now it is not defined. whn we divide any no. by very small no. surely quotient will be>>> tht means infinity\not defined.is answer

Log in to reply

IT IS UNMEASURABLE

Log in to reply