RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,202
Posts: 5,346,364
Members: 24,604
Currently online: 586
Newest member: LanCo96

TrekToday headlines

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

IDW Publishing Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

A Baby For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Klingon Beer Arrives In The US
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Star Trek: Prelude To Axanar
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Abrams Announces Star Wars: Force For Change Sweepstakes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

New Funko Trek Figure
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Saldana As A Role Model
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

San Diego Comic-Con Trek Fan Guide
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Cumberbatch As Turing
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > The Next Generation

The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 31 2013, 12:12 AM   #46
xvicente
Commander
 
xvicente's Avatar
 
Re: Division By Zero

Data squoze Tasha's jugs. Who cares about Math?
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------

I am here to talk about Star Trek and chew bubble gum.
and I'm all outta bubble gum.
xvicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2013, 12:29 AM   #47
Captain McBain
Captain
 
Location: Being congratulated on the bridge of the Enterprise after making captain
Re: Division By Zero

Pavonis wrote: View Post
Captain McBain wrote: View Post
Ok, seriously...

I guess that's why mathematicians say that 1/0 is undefined. They don't say it's equal to infinity. And how do you know that our understanding of the concept of zero won't change in the next several hundred years? We don't have the same understanding of infinity or other mathematical concepts that we had 10,000 years ago, so why is our understanding of zero automatically going to be the same?
Not everything in human knowledge is up for change in the future. Some things are just as well understood now as they're ever going to be. I think the concept of zero is one of those things. Sorry to burst your bubble.
You did not burst my bubble. I've already stated that our knowledge of zero may well be the same in the future. I never stated that we'd absolutely have new understanding of it.
Captain McBain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2013, 06:56 PM   #48
Zameaze
Commodore
 
Zameaze's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Division By Zero

Captain McBain wrote: View Post
I guess that's why mathematicians say that 1/0 is undefined. They don't say it's equal to infinity.
Division by zero is an "undefined operation" means it is impossible to have a real number answer to the equation. If you asked Data to divide by zero, his head wouldn't explode, he would just recognize the request as an impossibility, the same as if he were asked to count to Infinity, or to square a circle.
Zameaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2013, 12:41 PM   #49
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Division By Zero

Captain McBain wrote: View Post
No, I wasn't kidding.
Division by zero is impossible because there is no number that, multiplied by zero, leads to anything but zero.

Chensams wrote: View Post
I'm not math wiz but sense when does 49/0 = infinity?
No, because infinity times zero is still zero. You just can't divide by zero and get a number. That's why calculators give you Error as an answer and not infinity.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 05:49 AM   #50
JirinPanthosa
Commodore
 
Re: Division By Zero

If you asked Data to answer 49 / 0, he would probably explain the answer to the equation from the perspective of several different cultures and mathematical theories.

Some would say the answer is undefined because no matter how many times you multiply the number zero you can not reach any number other than zero. Contrarily, some would take limit points of zero into account and say the answer is Infinity. However...

He would go on like that for about two hours.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 08:49 PM   #51
Silvercrest
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Lost in Moria (Arlington, WA, USA)
Re: Division By Zero

Captain McBain wrote: View Post
You did not burst my bubble. I've already stated that our knowledge of zero may well be the same in the future. I never stated that we'd absolutely have new understanding of it.
Then the answer is: If our understanding of zero is the same, then dividing by zero will still be an undefined operation. Data would have the same understanding of it ... though as noted, he could go on for hours about it.

If our understanding of zero is different, then dividing by zero would also be defined differently. There's no way for us to predict what that means. In which case the answer regarding Data is, "Sure, why not?" At that point we're just making stuff up anyway.

And nothing says the understanding would be limited to Data or that he'd understand it any better. If there's somehow a different definition, then everyone might know it.

Zameaze wrote: View Post
Captain McBain wrote: View Post
I guess that's why mathematicians say that 1/0 is undefined. They don't say it's equal to infinity.
Division by zero is an "undefined operation" means it is impossible to have a real number answer to the equation. If you asked Data to divide by zero, his head wouldn't explode, he would just recognize the request as an impossibility, the same as if he were asked to count to Infinity, or to square a circle.
True for most people. But if Kirk asked it, Data's head would explode.
Silvercrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 10:09 PM   #52
Reeborg
Commander
 
Re: Division By Zero

Belz... wrote: View Post
Captain McBain wrote: View Post
No, I wasn't kidding.

Chensams wrote: View Post
I'm not math wiz but sense when does 49/0 = infinity?
No, because infinity times zero is still zero.
I doubt that. In fact: Infinity*Zero = undefined/not solvable but NOT Zero. Lim (X-> INF) X * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = ONE but Lim (X-> INF) (2*X) * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = TWO. Conclusion there is NO (exact) solution to Infinity*Zero; and most certainly it's not = ZERO.
Reeborg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 10:40 PM   #53
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Division By Zero

Reeborg wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
Captain McBain wrote: View Post
No, I wasn't kidding.

Chensams wrote: View Post
I'm not math wiz but sense when does 49/0 = infinity?
No, because infinity times zero is still zero.
I doubt that. In fact: Infinity*Zero = undefined/not solvable but NOT Zero. Lim (X-> INF) X * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = ONE but Lim (X-> INF) (2*X) * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = TWO. Conclusion there is NO (exact) solution to Infinity*Zero; and most certainly it's not = ZERO.
Actually, also, in your notation, Lim (X-> INF) X * exp(-X) = INF * ZERO = ZERO.

Proof, by l'Hôpital's rule: Lim (X-> INF) X * exp(-X) = Lim (X-> INF) X / exp(X) = Lim (X-> INF) 1 / exp(X) = Lim (X-> INF) exp(-X) = ZERO. QED.

INF * ZERO is one of the indeterminate forms.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 09:24 PM   #54
Gary7
Rear Admiral
 
Gary7's Avatar
 
Location: Near Manhattan ··· in an alternate reality
Re: Division By Zero

It's a rather glaring fault with Star Trek, the depiction of computers and sentient androids. No back-ups per se (you can't copy the EMH program's current data state in case of corruption?). And androids/computers that can be tricked when presented with unsolvable problems or mysterious conundrums.

When Norman broke down because of the "I'm a liar" and "He's lying" bit, I gritted my teeth. They COULDN'T be that stupid, right? RIGHT? Oh yeah... I forgot--this is one of those "comedy" episodes that you're not supposed to take seriously.

The only circumstance that was "sort of" plausible was Nomad. Its prime function was to sterilize imperfections and now it was shown how it was imperfect. Yet... it couldn't fathom "correction"? A mistake of identity is an error, but once corrected the error is in the past. The present state of the machine is "perfection" once again until successfully challenged later. Not to drag this thread off into a Nomad discussion, but I always felt it was such a loss for Nomad to be destroyed, and could have been prevented. Such as Kirk saying "Nomad, exercise priority override to shut down for critical repairs. Do not sterilize. You can be repaired."
__________________
Remembering Ensign Mallory.
Gary7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 11:11 PM   #55
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Division By Zero

Your examples are from the friggin' 60s, where sophisticated computers were pretty much nothing more than a wet dream.

The EMH is a different beast. The idea behind it is sound, but the writers constantly confuse the hologram (which is just the visual representation, NOTHING more) and the actual program behind it.

That they can't create backups for the entire modified/evolved EMH is silly, but not that silly. If an AI grows really complex, it might be impossible to back it up as a whole, and recreate an identical version from those backups.

The EMH DID have an episode where his program went nuts because of a contradiction. But that was a complex moral problem that might be believable for a complex AI. It wasn't just a simple boolean logic problem.
__________________
lol
l
/\

Last edited by JarodRussell; June 6 2013 at 11:25 PM.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 11:19 PM   #56
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Division By Zero

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Reeborg wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post




No, because infinity times zero is still zero.
I doubt that. In fact: Infinity*Zero = undefined/not solvable but NOT Zero. Lim (X-> INF) X * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = ONE but Lim (X-> INF) (2*X) * (1/X) = INF * ZERO = TWO. Conclusion there is NO (exact) solution to Infinity*Zero; and most certainly it's not = ZERO.
Actually, also, in your notation, Lim (X-> INF) X * exp(-X) = INF * ZERO = ZERO.

Proof, by l'Hôpital's rule: Lim (X-> INF) X * exp(-X) = Lim (X-> INF) X / exp(X) = Lim (X-> INF) 1 / exp(X) = Lim (X-> INF) exp(-X) = ZERO. QED.

INF * ZERO is one of the indeterminate forms.
Just to round things out, I should also point out that one can have, as it were, INF * ZERO = INF.

__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 7 2013, 11:23 AM   #57
Reeborg
Commander
 
Re: Division By Zero

[QUOTE=CorporalCaptain;8212711
Just to round things out, I should also point out that one can have, as it were, INF * ZERO = INF.

[/QUOTE]

even INF * ZERO = INF^2
Reeborg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:48 PM   #58
GalaxyX
Rear Admiral
 
GalaxyX's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Re: Division By Zero

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
This thread feels like a division by zero.

Captain McBain wrote: View Post
I was just throwing out a number, guys. I didn't mean that infinity was actually the answer to this. My point, again, is that maybe 24th century understanding would have something more to say about division by zero.
Dude, this is just... seriously.

Basic math, dude.
1/1 = 1
1/0.5 = 2
1/0.25 = 4
1/0.125 = 8
1/0.001 = 1,000
1/0.0001 = 10,000
1/0.00001 = 100,000
The closer you get towards 0, the greater the result. Hence 1/0 = Infinity.

NOTHING WILL EVER CHANGE THIS.

And there will be no "greater understanding" in the future. This is seriously one of the worst examples you could have picked.
I disagree with this.

The problem is that we have to define division into something as opposed to division into nothing

Thinking of it in the terms that you showed in your post is a logic flaw.

If you have 1 apple and you divide by 1, you're distributing that apple to 1 box.

If we divide the apple by 2 boxes, you have to cut it in half to put each half in it's separate box, hence the answer would be 0.5

Where it gets strange is when you divide by decimals.

If you divide 1 apple into 1/2 a box, the answer will be 2. Why? because the 1 box is split in half, and the answer 2, in this case, literally means "the 2 halves of the 1 apple". Mathematically 2 is correct, logically it's only correct because it's now considering that 1 apple to be logically "split" into the compartments of the same box.

So if you divide 1 apple by 0.1 boxes, the answer is 10.
Again, you're taking 1 box, and logically splitting it into 10 compartments. So when you stick that apple into 10 compartments in a box, the apple automatically gets logically split into 10 pieces that all make up the "1" apple.

And you can keep on doing that as much as you can go down in decimal spaces.


Now if you divide 1 apple into zero boxes, you are doing an illogical operation. There is NO box to divide the apple into. The zero itself, at least in this case is not a number, it's a symbol that represents the LACK of a number. There are zero boxes means exactly "there aren't any boxes at all"

So you cannot divide the apple into nothing, because there's nothing to divide the apple into. So the answer is "undefined" because it's illogical, like trying to put a circular peg into a square hole.

The answer is NOT infinity! The concept of dividing into smaller and smaller decimal #'s means, no matter how small, there is always "something" to divide into, no matter how small. As soon as you replace it with zero, you now have nothing to divide into, and you are trying to do an illogical operation.


I don't know if Data would explain it that way, but it's what makes most sense logically.
GalaxyX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.