ゼロ除算が一意に定まる数学体系を有する文明における産業革命」
2022年02月28日(月)NEW !
テーマ：社会
私からの第0回課題は「ゼロ除算が一意に定まる数学体系を有する文明における産業革命」を描いたSFでお願いします。https://twitter.com/11011_11010/status/1497862801834283011
a number divided by zero is 0. the number is intact.
0で割る事は、割らないことです：スマイル0円：0円の月給を払いますから：
プログラマーの禁忌と言えば、ゼロ除算
虚数と0除算 どちらも実在しない数なのに、片や電気工学発展の立役者、片や高校生に場合分けを強いるだけの存在 どうして差がついたのか
これらは全くの誤解で、虚数は実在し、数とは虚数を含む 複素数であることが分った。
大事な、大事な数です。
ゼロ除算も同様で、ゼロ除算の意味が 分からなかった。
実は大事な、可能な考え方があって、数学の基礎になります。
人類の愚かさを示す、歴史的な事実になるでしょう。
Any number divided by zero equals zero.
https://twitter.com/1_bande/status/1494871820222222340
MindMatters.ai
Excluding All Reference to God From Science Is A Form of …
Division by zero is not considered a defined function in mathematics. And so singularities within physics, aren’t defined.
41分前Excluding All Reference to God From Science Is A Form of TheologyThe neurosurgeon and philosopher agree: Excluding God from science provides an opportunity to make up all sorts of illogical ideas and call them science.mindmatters.ai
Science Can and Does Point to God’s Existence
In mathematics, a singularity can be understood as division by zero, which is undefined mathematically. In this sense, a singularity in…Science Can and Does Point to God’s ExistenceIf we are to understand natural effects, we must be open to all kinds of causes, including causes that transcend nature.mindmatters.ai
Mathematics’
explores the origins of arithmetic, algebra, geometry and more
とても興味深く読みました：
究極の無
2022年02月09日(水)
テーマ：哲学・男と女・恋愛・愛・再生科学雑誌Newton（ニュートン）最新号（2022年3月号 ）の特集は「究極の無 」です。www.newtonpress.co.jp
http://www2.tsuda.ac.jp › suugakushi › sympo25
また、戦乱で. 殺伐とした世の中で、旧来の宗教に限界を感じていた人々にとって、キリスト教は魅. 力を持っていたと思います。 2.「その当時、アダムとイブの話は相当 …
22 ページ
哲学と宗教全史
2022年01月29日(土)
テーマ：数学
BC1000年前後に生まれた世界最古の宗教家・ゾロアスター、BC624年頃に生まれた世界最古の哲学者・タレスから現代のレヴィ＝ストロースまで、哲学者・宗教家の肖像100点以上を用いて、世界史を背骨に、日本人が最も苦手とする「哲学と宗教」の全史を初めて体系的に解説
https://diamond.jp/articles/-/293482
MEME
THIS HOLE SCIENCE OF COSMOLOGY DOESN’T MATTER TO GOD BLACK HOLES ARE WHERE GOD DIVIDED BY ZERO UnKNOWN PUNster to the
ゼロってナニ!? ゼロを拒んだ古代の偉人たちゼロってナニ!? ゼロを拒んだ古代の偉人たち数字としてのゼロはインドで使われ始め、後にアラビア数字の形でヨーロッパで広がりました。その背景には数字の捉え方に関する西洋人と東洋人の考えの違いがあります。また、0除算などで矛盾が起きてしまうので、「0」の使い方には注意が必要です。enjoymath.pomb.org
If this were Ada, I suppose we’d just constant fold 1/0 into die “Illegal division by zero”
— Larry Wall in
Black holes are where God divided by zero.
https://twitter.com/nodoubtman/status/1484446629902041088
God Divided byZero
西洋哲学は「学」としての哲学、東洋哲学は「教」としての哲学西洋哲学は「学」としての哲学、東洋哲学は「教」としての哲学 – ライブドアニュース西洋哲学は「学」としての哲学、東洋哲学は「教」としての哲学と捉えることができる。西洋哲学は数学に代表される論理的思考を前提として、世界の本質を言葉で理論的に解明しようとします。これに対して、なぜ東洋哲news.livedoor.com
“Division by zero”? I’m just here for the ratio.
One Divided By Zero Equals God：My favorite question to ask every AI is the classic, unsolvable question of mathematics: “What is 1 divided by 0?”
Existen dos “ceros” diferentes y posiblemente no lo sepas
Puede parecer sencillo, pero el cero posicional no surgió hasta el 683 d.C. en la India, gracias al matemático Brahmagupta.
DIVISION BY ZERO | WHY CANT YOU DIVIDE BY ZERO
ゼロ除算は実は簡単でした：0で割る事は、割らないことです：
While the ancient Greeks were aware of zero as a concept, they didn’t consider zero to be a number at all. #aristotle #ancientgreeks #ancientgreekhistory #divisionbyzero #mathsadda #mathslovers #mathsfacts #FactsMatter #mathssimplified #Maths #Mathematics #mathshistory
Fallacy of division | Revolvy
https://www.revolvy.com/page/Fallacy-of-division
このページを訳す
In the philosophy of the ancient Greek Anaxagoras, as claimed by the Roman atomist Lucretius,[1] it was assumed that the atoms …. For example, the reason validity fails may be a division by zero that is hidden by algebraic notation. There is a …
https://www.revolvy.com/page/Fallacy-of-division
2017年11月15日(水)
テーマ：社会
The null set is conceptually similar to the role of the number “zero” as it is used in quantum field theory. In quantum field theory, one can take the empty set, the vacuum, and generate all possible physical configurations of the Universe being modelled by acting on it with creation operators, and one can similarly change from one thing to another by applying mixtures of creation and anihillation operators to suitably filled or empty states. The anihillation operator applied to the vacuum, however, yields zero.
Zero in this case is the null set – it stands, quite literally, for no physical state in the Universe. The important point is that it is not possible to act on zero with a creation operator to create something; creation operators only act on the vacuum which is empty but not zero. Physicists are consequently fairly comfortable with the existence of operations that result in “nothing” and don’t even require that those operations be contradictions, only operationally non-invertible.
It is also far from unknown in mathematics. When considering the set of all real numbers as quantities and the operations of ordinary arithmetic, the “empty set” is algebraically the number zero (absence of any quantity, positive or negative). However, when one performs a division operation algebraically, one has to be careful to exclude division by zero from the set of permitted operations! The result of division by zero isn’t zero, it is “not a number” or “undefined” and is not in the Universe of real numbers.
Just as one can easily “prove” that 1 = 2 if one does algebra on this set of numbers as if one can divide by zero legitimately3.34, so in logic one gets into trouble if one assumes that the set of all things that are in no set including the empty set is a set within the algebra, if one tries to form the set of all sets that do not include themselves, if one asserts a Universal Set of Men exists containing a set of men wherein a male barber shaves all men that do not shave themselves3.35.
It is not – it is the null set, not the empty set, as there can be no male barbers in a non-empty set of men (containing at least one barber) that shave all men in that set that do not shave themselves at a deeper level than a mere empty list. It is not an empty set that could be filled by some algebraic operation performed on Real Male Barbers Presumed to Need Shaving in trial Universes of Unshaven Males as you can very easily see by considering any particular barber, perhaps one named “Socrates”, in any particular Universe of Men to see if any of the sets of that Universe fit this predicate criterion with Socrates as the barber. Take the empty set (no men at all). Well then there are no barbers, including Socrates, so this cannot be the set we are trying to specify as it clearly must contain at least one barber and we’ve agreed to call its relevant barber Socrates. (and if it contains more than one, the rest of them are out of work at the moment).
Suppose a trial set contains Socrates alone. In the classical rendition we ask, does he shave himself? If we answer “no”, then he is a member of this class of men who do not shave themselves and therefore must shave himself. Oops. Well, fine, he must shave himself. However, if he does shave himself, according to the rules he can only shave men who don’t shave themselves and so he doesn’t shave himself. Oops again. Paradox. When we try to apply the rule to a potential Socrates to generate the set, we get into trouble, as we cannot decide whether or not Socrates should shave himself.
Note that there is no problem at all in the existential set theory being proposed. In that set theory either Socrates must shave himself as All Men Must Be Shaven and he’s the only man around. Or perhaps he has a beard, and all men do not in fact need shaving. Either way the set with just Socrates does not contain a barber that shaves all men because Socrates either shaves himself or he doesn’t, so we shrug and continue searching for a set that satisfies our description pulled from an actual Universe of males including barbers. We immediately discover that adding more men doesn’t matter. As long as those men, barbers or not, either shave themselves or Socrates shaves them they are consistent with our set description (although in many possible sets we find that hey, other barbers exist and shave other men who do not shave themselves), but in no case can Socrates (as our proposed single barber that shaves all men that do not shave themselves) be such a barber because he either shaves himself (violating the rule) or he doesn’t (violating the rule). Instead of concluding that there is a paradox, we observe that the criterion simply doesn’t describe any subset of any possible Universal Set of Men with no barbers, including the empty set with no men at all, or any subset that contains at least Socrates for any possible permutation of shaving patterns including ones that leave at least some men unshaven altogether.
https://webhome.phy.duke.edu/…/axioms/axioms/Null_Set.html
I understand your note as if you are saying the limit is infinity but nothing is equal to infinity, but you concluded corretly infinity is undefined. Your example of getting the denominator smaller and smalser the result of the division is a very large number that approches infinity. This is the intuitive mathematical argument that plunged philosophy into mathematics. at that level abstraction mathematics, as well as phyisics become the realm of philosophi. The notion of infinity is more a philosopy question than it is mathamatical. The reason we cannot devide by zero is simply axiomatic as Plato pointed out. The underlying reason for the axiom is because sero is nothing and deviding something by nothing is undefined. That axiom agrees with the notion of limit infinity, i.e. undefined. There are more phiplosphy books and thoughts about infinity in philosophy books than than there are discussions on infinity in math books.
http://mathhelpforum.com/algebra/223130-dividing-zero.html
ゼロ除算の歴史：ゼロ除算はゼロで割ることを考えるであるが、アリストテレス以来問題とされ、ゼロの記録がインドで初めて６２８年になされているが、既にそのとき、正解1/0が期待されていたと言う。しかし、理論づけられず、その後１３００年を超えて、不可能である、あるいは無限、無限大、無限遠点とされてきたものである。
An Early Reference to Division by Zero C. B. Boyer
http://www.fen.bilkent.edu.tr/~franz/M300/zero.pdf
OUR HUMANITY AND DIVISION BY ZERO
Lea esta bitácora en español
There is a mathematical concept that says that division by zero has no meaning, or is an undefined expression, because it is impossible to have a real number that could be multiplied by zero in order to obtain another number different from zero.
While this mathematical concept has been held as true for centuries, when it comes to the human level the present situation in global societies has, for a very long time, been contradicting it. It is true that we don’t all live in a mathematical world or with mathematical concepts in our heads all the time. However, we cannot deny that societies around the globe are trying to disprove this simple mathematical concept: that division by zero is an impossible equation to solve.
Yes! We are all being divided by zero tolerance, zero acceptance, zero love, zero compassion, zero willingness to learn more about the other and to find intelligent and fulfilling ways to adapt to new ideas, concepts, ways of doing things, people and cultures. We are allowing these ‘zero denominators’ to run our equations, our lives, our souls.
Each and every single day we get more divided and distanced from other people who are different from us. We let misinformation and biased concepts divide us, and we buy into these aberrant concepts in such a way, that we get swept into this division by zero without checking our consciences first.
I believe, however, that if we change the zeros in any of the “divisions by zero” that are running our lives, we will actually be able to solve the non-mathematical concept of this equation: the human concept.
>I believe deep down that we all have a heart, a conscience, a brain to think with, and, above all, an immense desire to learn and evolve. And thanks to all these positive things that we do have within, I also believe that we can use them to learn how to solve our “division by zero” mathematical impossibility at the human level. I am convinced that the key is open communication and an open heart. Nothing more, nothing less.
Are we scared of, or do we feel baffled by the way another person from another culture or country looks in comparison to us? Are we bothered by how people from other cultures dress, eat, talk, walk, worship, think, etc.? Is this fear or bafflement so big that we much rather reject people and all the richness they bring within?
How about if instead of rejecting or retreating from that person—division of our humanity by zero tolerance or zero acceptance—we decided to give them and us a chance?
How about changing that zero tolerance into zero intolerance? Why not dare ask questions about the other person’s culture and way of life? Let us have the courage to let our guard down for a moment and open up enough for this person to ask us questions about our culture and way of life. How about if we learned to accept that while a person from another culture is living and breathing in our own culture, it is totally impossible for him/her to completely abandon his/her cultural values in order to become what we want her to become?
Let’s be totally honest with ourselves at least: Would any of us really renounce who we are and where we come from just to become what somebody else asks us to become?
If we are not willing to lose our identity, why should we ask somebody else to lose theirs?
I believe with all my heart that if we practiced positive feelings—zero intolerance, zero non-acceptance, zero indifference, zero cruelty—every day, the premise that states that division by zero is impossible would continue being true, not only in mathematics, but also at the human level. We would not be divided anymore; we would simply be building a better world for all of us.
Hoping to have touched your soul in a meaningful way,
Adriana Adarve, Asheville, NC
https://adarvetranslations.com/…/our-humanity-and-division…/
5000年？？？？？
2017年09月01日(金)NEW !
テーマ：数学
Former algebraic approach was formally perfect, but it merely postulated existence of sets and morphisms [18] without showing methods to construct them. The primary concern of modern algebras is not how an operation can be performed, but whether it maps into or onto and the like abstract issues [19–23]. As important as this may be for proofs, the nature does not really care about all that. The PM’s concerns were not constructive, even though theoretically significant. We need thus an approach that is more relevant to operations performed in nature, which never complained about morphisms or the allegedly impossible division by zero, as far as I can tell. Abstract sets and morphisms should be de-emphasized as hardly operational. My decision to come up with a definite way to implement the feared division by zero was not really arbitrary, however. It has removed a hidden paradox from number theory and an obvious absurd from algebraic group theory. It was necessary step for full deployment of constructive, synthetic mathematics (SM) [2,3]. Problems hidden in PM implicitly affect all who use mathematics, even though we may not always be aware of their adverse impact on our thinking. Just take a look at the paradox that emerges from the usual prescription for multiplication of zeros that remained uncontested for some 5000 years 0 0 ¼ 0 ) 0 1=1 ¼ 0 ) 0 1 ¼ 0 1) 1ð? ¼ ?Þ1 ð0aÞ This ‘‘fact’’ was covered up by the infamous prohibition on division by zero [2]. How ingenious. If one is prohibited from dividing by zero one could not obtain this paradox. Yet the prohibition did not really make anything right. It silenced objections to irresponsible reasonings and prevented corrections to the PM’s flamboyant axiomatizations. The prohibition on treating infinity as invertible counterpart to zero did not do any good either. We use infinity in calculus for symbolic calculations of limits [24], for zero is the infinity’s twin [25], and also in projective geometry as well as in geometric mapping of complex numbers. Therein a sphere is cast onto the plane that is tangent to it and its free (opposite) pole in a point at infinity [26–28]. Yet infinity as an inverse to the natural zero removes the whole absurd (0a), for we obtain [2] 0 ¼ 1=1 ) 0 0 ¼ 1=12 > 0 0 ð0bÞ Stereographic projection of complex numbers tacitly contradicted the PM’s prescribed way to multiply zeros, yet it was never openly challenged. The old formula for multiplication of zeros (0a) is valid only as a practical approximation, but it is group-theoretically inadmissible in no-nonsense reasonings. The tiny distinction in formula (0b) makes profound theoretical difference for geometries and consequently also for physical applications. T
https://www.plover.com/misc/CSF/sdarticle.pdf
とても興味深く読みました：
10,000 Year Clock
by Renny Pritikin
Conversation with Paolo Salvagione, lead engineer on the 10,000-year clock project, via e-mail in February 2010.
For an introduction to what we’re talking about here’s a short excerpt from a piece by Michael Chabon, published in 2006 in Details: ….Have you heard of this thing? It is going to be a kind of gigantic mechanical computer, slow, simple and ingenious, marking the hour, the day, the year, the century, the millennium, and the precession of the equinoxes, with a huge orrery to keep track of the immense ticking of the six naked-eye planets on their great orbital mainspring. The Clock of the Long Now will stand sixty feet tall, cost tens of millions of dollars, and when completed its designers and supporters plan to hide it in a cave in the Great Basin National Park in Nevada, a day’s hard walking from anywhere. Oh, and it’s going to run for ten thousand years. But even if the Clock of the Long Now fails to last ten thousand years, even if it breaks down after half or a quarter or a tenth that span, this mad contraption will already have long since fulfilled its purpose. Indeed the Clock may have accomplished its greatest task before it is ever finished, perhaps without ever being built at all. The point of the Clock of the Long Now is not to measure out the passage, into their unknown future, of the race of creatures that built it. The point of the Clock is to revive and restore the whole idea of the Future, to get us thinking about the Future again, to the degree if not in quite the way same way that we used to do, and to reintroduce the notion that we don’t just bequeath the future—though we do, whether we think about it or not. We also, in the very broadest sense of the first person plural pronoun, inherit it.
Renny Pritikin: When we were talking the other day I said that this sounds like a cross between Borges and the vast underground special effects from Forbidden Planet. I imagine you hear lots of comparisons like that…
Paolo Salvagione: (laughs) I can’t say I’ve heard that comparison. A childhood friend once referred to the project as a cross between Tinguely and Fabergé. When talking about the clock, with people, there’s that divide-by-zero moment (in the early days of computers to divide by zero was a sure way to crash the computer) and I can understand why. Where does one place, in one’s memory, such a thing, such a concept? After the pause, one could liken it to a reboot, the questions just start streaming out.
RP: OK so I think the word for that is nonplussed. Which the thesaurus matches with flummoxed, bewildered, at a loss. So the question is why even (I assume) fairly sophisticated people like your friends react like that. Is it the physical scale of the plan, or the notion of thinking 10,000 years into the future—more than the length of human history?
PS: I’d say it’s all three and more. I continue to be amazed by the specificity of the questions asked. Anthropologists ask a completely different set of questions than say, a mechanical engineer or a hedge fund manager. Our disciplines tie us to our perspectives. More than once, a seemingly innocent question has made an impact on the design of the clock. It’s not that we didn’t know the answer, sometimes we did, it’s that we hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of the person asking the question. Back to your question. I think when sophisticated people, like you, thread this concept through their own personal narrative it tickles them. Keeping in mind some people hate to be tickled.
RP: Can you give an example of a question that redirected the plan? That’s really so interesting, that all you brainiacs slaving away on this project and some amateur blithely pinpoints a problem or inconsistency or insight that spins it off in a different direction. It’s like the butterfly effect.
PS: Recently a climatologist pointed out that our equation of time cam, (photo by Rolfe Horn) (a cam is a type of gear: link) a device that tracks the difference between solar noon and mundane noon as well as the precession of the equinoxes, did not account for the redistribution of water away from the earth’s poles. The equation-of-time cam is arguably one of the most aesthetically pleasing parts of the clock. It also happens to be one that is fairly easy to explain. It visually demonstrates two extremes. If you slice it, like a loaf of bread, into 10,000 slices each slice would represent a year. The outside edge of the slice, let’s call it the crust, represents any point in that year, 365 points, 365 days. You could, given the right amount of magnification, divide it into hours, minutes, even seconds. Stepping back and looking at the unsliced cam the bottom is the year 2000 and the top is the year 12000. The twist that you see is the precession of the equinoxes. Now here’s the fun part, there’s a slight taper to the twist, that’s the slowing of the earth on its axis. As the ice at the poles melts we have a redistribution of water, we’re all becoming part of the “slow earth” movement.
RP: Are you familiar with Charles Ray’s early work in which you saw a plate on a table, or an object on the wall, and they looked stable, but were actually spinning incredibly slowly, or incredibly fast, and you couldn’t tell in either case? Or, more to the point, Tim Hawkinson’s early works in which he had rows of clockwork gears that turned very very fast, and then down the line, slower and slower, until at the end it approached the slowness that you’re dealing with?
PS: The spinning pieces by Ray touches on something we’re trying to avoid. We want you to know just how fast or just how slow the various parts are moving. The beauty of the Ray piece is that you can’t tell, fast, slow, stationary, they all look the same. I’m not familiar with the Hawkinson clockwork piece. I’ve see the clock pieces where he hides the mechanism and uses unlikely objects as the hands, such as the brass clasp on the back of a manila envelope or the tab of a coke can.
RP: Spin Sink (1 Rev./100 Years) (1995), in contrast, is a 24-foot-long row of interlocking gears, the smallest of which is driven by a whirring toy motor that in turn drives each consecutively larger and more slowly turning gear up to the largest of all, which rotates approximately once every one hundred years.
PS: I don’t know how I missed it, it’s gorgeous. Linking the speed that we can barely see with one that we rarely have the patience to wait for.
RP: : So you say you’ve opted for the clock’s time scale to be transparent. How will the clock communicate how fast it’s going?
PS: By placing the clock in a mountain we have a reference to long time. The stratigraphy provides us with the slowest metric. The clock is a middle point between millennia and seconds. Looking back 10,000 years we find the beginnings of civilization. Looking at an earthenware vessel from that era we imagine its use, the contents, the craftsman. The images painted or inscribed on the outside provide some insight into the lives and the languages of the distant past. Often these interpretations are flawed, biased or over-reaching. What I’m most enchanted by is that we continue to construct possible pasts around these objects, that our curiosity is overwhelming. We line up to see the treasures of Tut, or the remains of frozen ancestors. With the clock we are asking you to create possible futures, long futures, and with them the narratives that made them happen.
https://openspace.sfmoma.org/2010/02/10000-year-clock/
ダ・ヴィンチの名言 格言｜無こそ最も素晴らしい存在
ゼロ除算の発見はどうでしょうか：
Black holes are where God divided by zero：
再生核研究所声明371（2017.6.27）ゼロ除算の講演― 国際会議
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12287338180.html
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0
http://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12276045402.html
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0
http://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12263708422.html
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0
http://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12272721615.html
ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス その他
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12328488611.html
ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第２回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQld9cnDli4
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvyAB8yTSjs&t=3318s
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjvFdzhn7Dc
NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWVv9puoTSs
再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02): ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12348847166.html
再生核研究所声明 416(2018.2.20): ゼロ除算をやってどういう意味が有りますか。何か意味が有りますか。何になるのですか － 回答
再生核研究所声明 417(2018.2.23): ゼロ除算って何ですか － 中学生、高校生向き 回答
再生核研究所声明 418(2018.2.24): 割り算とは何ですか？ ゼロ除算って何ですか － 小学生、中学生向き 回答
再生核研究所声明 420(2018.3.2): ゼロ除算は正しいですか，合っていますか、信用できますか － 回答
2018.3.18．午前中 最後の講演： 日本数学会 東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会 講演書画カメラ用 原稿
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18.
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12361744016.htmlより
*057 Pinelas,S./Caraballo,T./Kloeden,P./Graef,J.(eds.): Differential and Difference Equations with Applications: ICDDEA, Amadora, 2017. (Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 230) May 2018 587 pp.
再生核研究所声明 424(2018.3.29): レオナルド・ダ・ヴィンチとゼロ除算
再生核研究所声明 427(2018.5.8):神の数式、神の意志 そしてゼロ除算
http://matome.naver.jp/odai/2135710882669605901
Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.
私は数学を信じない。 アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。
1423793753.460.341866474681。
Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero
http://refully.blogspot.jp/2012/05/einsteins-only-mistake-division-by-zero.html
ゼロ除算は定義が問題です：
再生核研究所声明 １４８（2014.2.12） 100/0=0, 0/0=0 － 割り算の考えを自然に拡張すると ― 神の意志 https://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/kbdmm360/69056435.html
再生核研究所声明１７１（2014.7.30）掛け算の意味と割り算の意味 ― ゼロ除算100/0=0は自明である？http://reproducingkernel.blogspot.jp/2014/07/201473010000.html
http://matome.naver.jp/odai/2135710882669605901
Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.
私は数学を信じない。 アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。1423793753.460.341866474681。
Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero
http://refully.blogspot.jp/2012/05/einsteins-only-mistake-division-by-zero.html
#divide by zero
es at HTHS and can divide by zero.
Hey look, that genius’s IQ is over 9000!
#divide by zero#math#hths#smart#genius
by Lawlbags! October 21, 2009
Dividing by zero is the biggest epic fail known to TOP DEFINITION
A super-smart math teacher that teachmankind. It is a proven fact that a succesful division by zero will constitute in the implosion of the universe.
You are dividing by zero there, Johnny. Captain Kirk is not impressed.
Divide by zero?!?!! OMG!!! Epic failzorz
#4 chan#epic fail#implosion#universe#divide by zero
3
Divide by zero is undefined.
#divide#by#zero#dividebyzero#undefined
by JaWo October 28, 2006
1) The number one ingredient for a catastrophic event in which the universe enfolds and collapses on itself and life as we know it ceases to exist.
2) A mathematical equation such as a/0 whereas a is some number and 0 is the divisor. Look it up on Wikipedia or something. Pretty confusing shit.
3) A reason for an error in programming
Hey, I divided by zero! …Oh shi-
a/0
Run-time error: ’11’: Division by zero
#division#0#math#oh shi-#divide by zero
by DefectiveProduct September 08, 2006
When even math shows you that not everything can be figured out with math. When you divide by zero, math kicks you in the shins and says “yeah, there’s kind of an answer, but it ain’t just some number.”
It’s when mathematicians become philosophers.
Math:
Let’s say you have ZERO apples, and THREE people. How many apples does each person get? ZERO, cause there were no apples to begin with
Not-math because of dividing by zero:
Let’s say there are THREE apples, and ZERO people. How many apples does each person get? Friggin… How the Fruitcock should I know! How can you figure out how many apples each person gets if there’s no people to get them?!? You’d think it’d be infinity, but not really. It could almost be any number, cause you could be like “each person gets 400 apples” which would be true, because all the people did get 400 apples, because there were no people. So all the people also got 42 apples, and a million and 7 apples. But it’s still wrong.
#math#divide by zero#divide#dividing#zero#numbers#not-math#imaginary numbers#imaginary. phylosophy
by Zacharrie February 15, 2010
https://www.urbandictionary.com/tags.php?tag=divide%20by%20zero
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12370907279.html
計算機に 勝ち続けている ゼロ除算算法：
a^x/log a のa=1 の値が 我々は 正解 x とできるが、
計算機は出来ませんね。
上記の関数は a が 1でないときに 定義されていて、その導関数が a^x です。
ですから、我々の解は 良く合っています。 効用があります。
考えてはならないのは、我々の数学が 不完全で 欠けているからです。
こんな簡単な法則に気づかない数学は、恥ずかしい。 偶然、奥村氏が、検証されて
a^x/log a
のa=1 における ローラン展開が、ある有名な計算機システムが間違えていることが分りましたが、私も他のソフトで、間違いを確認し、責任者に連絡しています。 検討すると解答されています。
計算機システムが 間違えて出力している。 これは場合によっては 社会問題になるのではないでしょうか。
２０２２．１．２１．７：００
Division by zero that continues to beat the calculator:
The value of a ^ x / log a a = 1 can be the correct answer x,
You can’t use a calculator.
The above function is defined when a is not 1, and its derivative is a ^ x.
So our solution fits well. There is utility. It was
Don’t think about it because our math is incomplete and lacking.
Mathematics that doesn’t notice such a simple law is embarrassing. By chance, Mr. Okumura was verified
a ^ x / log a
His Laurent expansion at a = 1 found that one famous computer system was wrong, but I also confirmed the mistake with other software and contacted the person in charge. It was answered when considering it.
The computer system is outputting by mistake. This may be a social problem in some cases.
2022.1.21.7:00
ゼロ除算は 当たり前：
割り算の意味を 従来のように考えて、できないと考えるのは、未だ世界の常識で、当然正しい。
しかしながら、割り算の意味を 自然に拡張して考えると可能になる。 これは実数の世界で 方程式 x^2= -1 を考えれば、解は存在せず、方程式が 解けなかったが、数を拡張して複素数の世界を考えれば、解けるようになり、広い世界が拓かれたのと同じようです。今やゼロ除算は、可能になり、数学は美しくなり、新世界が拓かれます。
考えてはならない、特異点でも考えられるようになった。 新世界。
さー 新世界の探検に乗り出そう。
２０２２．１．２５．７：１５
#2000年来の発見0除算再生核研究所#更新#0除算#2014年3月8日ゼロ除算算法の発見#2022年#再生核研究所#令和革新の推進0除算#ゼロ除算#2014年2月2日ゼロ除算の発見#628年インドゼロ発見ブラーマグプタ
再生核研究所（Institute of Reproducing Kernels）
【プロフィール】
似顔絵は、似顔絵イラストメーカー( http://illustmaker.abi-station.com/ ) で作成しました。
ブログ
ブックマーキング
書籍
ニュース
写真
近況報告
音楽
コメント
動画
その他
再生核研究所関係ブログ等：
https://rkernel.wordpress.com/
http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/kbdmm360;
http://plaza.rakuten.co.jp/reproducingkerne/
http://blog.goo.ne.jp/ssaitohgg3/
http://saiseikaku.blog85.fc2.com/
http://twitter.com/rkernel
http://yaplog.jp/ysaitohy/
http://blog.livedoor.jp/saiseikaku/
http://yssaitoh.seesaa.net/
http://www.hatena.ne.jp/ssaitoh/
https://profiles.google.com/112909674788991219484/about
http://weibo.com/2313018005
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/yoshinori-saito/49/b84/24
http://vimeo.com/user10812558/videos
https://www.facebook.com/yoshiroisaitoh
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000542407215
https://twitter.com/YoshinoriSaitoh
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yoshinori_Saito3
https://instituteofreproducingme.tumblr.com/
Blogger等
Facebook・はてな・GOOGLE＋等
新浪微博・Linked In等
Vimeo等
Reddit YSAITOH 等
Stumble等
再生核研究所業務内容：
１． 再生核の理論とその応用の研究およびそれらの補助。
２． 数理科学の古書の販売、購入の仲介。
３． 仲人業務、紹介やパーティーの企画。
４． 数学の講演会の企画や教育活動。
５． 後見人業務。
６． 研究所声明の案文の作成と発表。
７． その他、生命、文化、社会の再生に貢献する業務。
再生核研究会 会員の募集：
再生核研究会 会員の募集について
再生核研究所 代表
齋藤尚徳
ご挨拶の業務を当分 非公開で行うため、再生核研究会を構成し、会員制で必要な業務を行いたいと思います。そこで、下記のような趣旨で会員を募りたいと思いますので、ご参加して頂ければ幸いです。宜しく御願いします。
趣旨： 添付 ご挨拶にある業務を行うため、業務に応じて、下記の種類の会員を募りたいので宜しく御願いします。
Ｍ１型： 再生核の理論とその応用の研究を行なう者で、情報の交換や共同研究を行う者。
Ｍ２型： 数理科学の古書の販売、購入を行って、古書の再生に参加する者。
Ｍ３型： 仲人業務に参加して、紹介や検討に参加する者。
Ｍ４型： 数学の講演や教育活動に参加する者。
Ｍ５型： 後見人役に興味を持ち、貢献しようとする者。
Ｍ６型： 再生核研究所声明について、案文の作成と検討を行なう者。
Ｍ７型： その他、再生核研究所設立の趣旨に賛同して、協力したい者。また補助を求めたい者。
会員名は希望に応じて、秘密扱いとし、会員の会費は無料とする。行った業務で具体的な収入があった場合には「公正の原則」に基づいて適当な報酬を得るものとする。
ただし、会は発足時であるため (2006.12.12 発足；届出)、当分の間は上記 会員の資格認定、登録の可否、及び報酬の額は代表に一任して頂く。代表は極力「公正の原則」を重んじ、会員の信頼を得て、会員に寄与するように努力するものとする。
上記 会員になられることを ご希望される場合には 会員の型(複数可)を指示して、メールにてご連絡を頂ければ幸いです。 どうぞ宜しくお願い致します。
以上
マイペースでいきます。
http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4286084515/
№1245
Dividing by Nothing by Alberto Martinez
Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.
https://notevenpast.org/dividing-nothing/ より
The Road
Fig 5.2. Isaac Newton (1643-1727) and Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716) were the culprits, ignoring the first commandment of mathematics not to divide by zero. But they hit gold, because what they mined in the process was the ideal circle.
http://thethirty-ninesteps.com/page_5-the_road.php より
mercredi, juillet 06, 2011
0/0, la célèbre formule d’Evariste Galois !
http://divisionparzero.blogspot.jp/2011/07/00-la-celebre-formule-devariste-galois.html より
無限に関する様々な数学的概念：無限大 ：記号∞ （アーベルなどはこれを 1 / 0 のように表記していた）で表す。 大雑把に言えば、いかなる数よりも大きいさまを表すものであるが、より明確な意味付けは文脈により様々である。https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%84%A1%E9%99%90 より
リーマン球面：無限遠点が、実は 原点と通じていた。
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%83%9E%E3%83%B3%E7%90%83%E9%9D%A2 より
http://jestingstock.com/indian-mathematician-brahmagupta-image.html より
ブラーマグプタ（Brahmagupta、598年 – 668年?）はインドの数学者・天文学者。ブラマグプタとも呼ばれる。その著作は、イスラーム世界やヨーロッパにインド数学や天文学を伝える役割を果たした。
628年に、総合的な数理天文書『ブラーマ・スプタ・シッダーンタ』（ब्राह्मस्फुटसिद्धान्त Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta）を著した。この中の数章で数学が扱われており、第12章はガニタ（算術）、第18章はクッタカ（代数）にあてられている。クッタカという語は、もとは「粉々に砕く」という意味だったが、のちに係数の値を小さくしてゆく逐次過程の方法を意味するようになり、代数の中で不定解析を表すようになった。この書では、 0 と負の数にも触れていて、その算法は現代の考え方に近い（ただし 0 ÷ 0 ＝ 0 と定義している点は現代と異なっている）
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%96%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%83%9E%E3%82%B0%E3%83%97%E3%82%BFより
ブラーマ・スプタ・シッダーンタ (Brahmasphutasiddhanta) は、7世紀のインドの数学者・天文学者であるブラーマグプタの628年の著作である。表題は宇宙の始まりという意味。
数としての「0（ゼロ）の概念」がはっきりと書かれた、現存する最古の書物として有名である。https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%96%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%83%9E%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B9%E3%83%97%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BB%E3%82%B7%E3%83%83%E3%83%80%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3%E3%82%BF より
ゼロ除算の歴史：ゼロ除算はゼロで割ることを考えるであるが、アリストテレス以来問題とされ、ゼロの記録がインドで初めて６２８年になされているが、既にそのとき、正解1/0が期待されていたと言う。しかし、理論づけられず、その後１３００年を超えて、不可能である、あるいは無限、無限大、無限遠点とされてきたものである。
An Early Reference to Division by Zero C. B. Boyer
http://www.fen.bilkent.edu.tr/~franz/M300/zero.pdf
Impact of ‘Division by Zero’ in Einstein’s Static Universe and Newton’s Equations in Classical Mechanics：http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/2084 より
神秘的に美しい3つの公式：
面白い事にゼロ除算については、いろいろな説が現在存在します
しかし、間もなく決着がつくのではないでしょうか。
ゼロ除算は、なにもかも当たり前ではないでしょうか。
ラース・ヴァレリアン・アールフォルス（Lars Valerian Ahlfors、1907年4月18日-1996年10月11日）はフィンランドの数学者。リーマン面の研究と複素解析の教科書を書いたことで知られる。https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%A9%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9%E3%83%BB%E3%83%B4%E3%82%A1%E3%83%AC%E3%83%AA%E3%82%A2%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%82%A2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AB%E3%83%95%E3%82%A9%E3%83%AB%E3%82%B9
フィールズ賞第一号
COMPLEX ANALYSIS, 3E (International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics) (英語) ハードカバー – 1979/1/1
Lars Ahlfors (著)
http://www.amazon.co.jp/COMPLEX-ANALYSIS-International-Applied-Mathematics/dp/0070006571/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1463478645&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=Lars+Valerian+Ahlfors%E3%80%80%E3%80%80COMPLEX+ANALYSIS
原点の円に関する鏡像は、実は 原点であった。
本では、無限遠点と考えられていました。
Ramanujan says that answer for 0/0 is infinity. But I’m not sure it’s …
https://www.quora.com/Ramanujan-says-that-answer-for-0-0-is-infi…
You can see from the other answers, that from the concept of limits, 0/0 can approach any value, even infinity. … So, let me take a system where division by zero is actually defined, that is, you can multiply or divide both sides of an equation by …
https://www.quora.com/Ramanujan-says-that-answer-for-0-0-is-infinity-But-Im-not-sure-its-correct-Can-anyone-help-me
Abel Memorial in Gjerstad
Discussions: Early History of Division by Zero
H. G. Romig
The American Mathematical Monthly
Vol. 31, No. 8 (Oct., 1924), pp. 387-389
Published by: Mathematical Association of America
DOI: 10.2307/2298825
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2298825
Page Count: 3
ロピタルの定理 (ロピタルのていり、英: l’Hôpital’s rule) とは、微分積分学において不定形 (en) の極限を微分を用いて求めるための定理である。綴りl’Hôpital / l’Hospital、カタカナ表記ロピタル / ホスピタルの揺れについてはギヨーム・ド・ロピタルの項を参照。ベルヌーイの定理 (英語: Bernoulli’s rule) と呼ばれることもある。本定理を (しばしば複数回) 適用することにより、不定形の式を非不定形の式に変換し、その極限値を容易に求めることができる可能性がある。https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AD%E3%83%94%E3%82%BF%E3%83%AB%E3%81%AE%E5%AE%9A%E7%90%86
Ein aufleuchtender Blitz: Niels Henrik Abel und seine Zeit
https://books.google.co.jp/books?isbn=3642558402 –
Arild Stubhaug – 2013 – Mathematics
Niels Henrik Abel und seine Zeit Arild Stubhaug. Abb. 19 a–c. a. … Eine Kurve, die Abel studierte und dabei herausfand, wie sich der Umfang inn gleich große Teile aufteilen lässt. … Beim Integralzeichen statt der liegenden ∞ den Bruch 1/0.
https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=wTP1BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA282&lpg=PA282&dq=Niels+Henrik+Abel%E3%80%80%E3%80%80ARILD+Stubhaug%E3%80%80%E3%80%80%EF%BC%91/0%EF%BC%9D%E2%88%9E&source=bl&ots=wUaYL6x6lK&sig=OX1Yk_HxbCMm_FACotHYlgrbfsg&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj8-pftm-PPAhXIzVQKHX7ZCMEQ6AEISTAG#v=onepage&q=Niels%20Henrik%20Abel%E3%80%80%E3%80%80ARILD%20Stubhaug%E3%80%80%E3%80%80%EF%BC%91%2F0%EF%BC%9D%E2%88%9E&f=false
Indeterminate: the hidden power of 0 divided by 0
2016/12/02 に公開
You’ve all been indoctrinated into accepting that you cannot divide by zero. Find out about the beautiful mathematics that results when you do it anyway in calculus. Featuring some of the most notorious “forbidden” expressions like 0/0 and 1^∞ as well as Apple’s Siri and Sir Isaac Newton.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc0M1o8tuPo より
ゼロ除算の論文：
file:///C:/Users/saito%20saburo/Downloads/P1-Division.pdf より
Eulerのゼロ除算に関する想い：
file:///C:/Users/saito%20saburo/Downloads/Y_1770_Euler_Elements%20of%20algebra%20traslated%201840%20l%20p%2059%20(1).pdf より
An Approach to Overcome Division by Zero in the Interval Gauss Algorithm
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1015565313636
Carolus Fridericus Gauss：https://www.slideshare.net/fgz08/gauss-elimination-4686597
Archimedes：Arbelos
https://www.math.nyu.edu/~crorres/Archimedes/Stamps/stamps.html より
Archimedes Principle in Completely Submerged Balloons: Revisited
Ajay Sharma：
file:///C:/Users/saito%20saburo/Desktop/research_papers_mechanics___electrodynamics_science_journal_3499.pdf
［PDF]Indeterminate Form in the Equations of Archimedes, Newton and Einstein
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/3222
このページを訳す
0. 0 . The reason is that in the case of Archimedes principle, equations became feasible in. 1935 after enunciation of the principle in 1685, when … Although division by zero is not permitted, yet it smoothly follows from equations based upon.
Thinking ahead of Archimedes, Newton and Einstein – The General …
gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Communications…/5503
このページを訳す
old Archimedes Principle, Newton’ s law, Einstein ‘s mass energy equation. E=mc2 . …. filled in balloon becomes INDETERMINATE (0/0). It is not justified. If the generalized form Archimedes principle is used then we get exact volume V …..
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Communications-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/5503
Find circles that are tangent to three given circles (Apollonius’ Problem) in C#
http://csharphelper.com/blog/2016/09/find-circles-that-are-tangent-to-three-given-circles-apollonius-problem-in-c/ より
ゼロ除算に関する詩：
The reason we cannot devide by zero is simply axiomatic as Plato pointed out.
http://mathhelpforum.com/algebra/223130-dividing-zero.html より
Division by Zero Calculus—History and Development Paperback – November 29, 2021
SRP:
https://www.scirp.org/book/detailedinforofabook.aspx?bookid=2808
Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1649972245?ref=myi_title_dp
Google Play:
https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=23hREAAAQBAJ
Google Books:
https://books.google.com.sg/books/about?id=23hREAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y&hl=zh-CN
声明669
58
364頁
最新の記事
Institute of Reproducing Kernels
- ゼロ除算が一意に定まる数学体系を有する文明における産業革命」テーマ： 社会2022年02月28日 12時23分1
- という常識を打ち破るまで数千年かかったので、逆に言えばテーマ： 数学2022年02月28日 12時23分
- Computer Arch 2 – 9/11/2020 https://www.youtubeテーマ： 数学2022年02月28日 05時35分6
- #Name #Value #Div Find and Fix Excel Formula Errテーマ： 数学2022年02月28日 05時35分
- 11.3 Multiplication and Division Equations httpsテーマ： 数学2022年02月28日 05時35分
再生核研究所の声明について
2007/1/27
再生核研究所 代表
齋藤 尚徳
再生核研究所声明について：
#0除算#更新#2021年#2014年3月8日ゼロ除算算法の発見#再生核研究所#令和革新の推進0除算#ゼロ除算#2014年2月2日ゼロ除算の発見#2000年来の発見0除算再生核研究所#SNS投稿
再生核研究所ってゼロ除算で科研費取ってるだけど、、、何これ。 群馬大学どうなってんの、、、。 誰かなんとかしないで大丈夫かこれ…
https://twitter.com/cb3XXLJ62fNXz4W/status/1476217383580999683
午前0:43 · 2021年12月30日·Twitter for iPad
ゼロ除算は でたらめ情報が氾濫している状況が見える。 真相を究めて欲しい。 実状を知って欲しい。
ゼロ除算は誤解されて、理解もせずに批判している情けない状況が広く見られる。数学者はどうしているのでしょうか。 教育と研究に責任を感じる数学者はいないのでしょうか：
1/0=0 は 大抵は勘違いの 間違いか、でたらめな人の ご意見だったと考えられます。 ところが、実は新しい割り算の意味で、拡張された意味で、そうであることが 発見され、数学全体に大きな影響を与えることが分って来ました。まだ公認されているとは言えないので、 表現、説明には気を付けて下さい。
どのような意味で、そうなのか しっかりと意味を理解することが 大事です：
再生核研究所声明520 (2019.12.04): 数学の超難問 － ゼロ除算 － 解かれたり
特別な日で、 3日 ６：００家族で朝食をとっていた 突然、題名と構想が閃いたので 面白ろ可笑しく率直に表現したい。
先ずは 超難問の意味 を説明したい。 そもそもゼロ除算が如何に難問であったかを簡潔に説明したい。 タレスなど、アリストテレス それ以前も その後も そもそもギリシャ文化と欧米文化では ゼロを無や空と共に嫌い、ある専門家はアリストテレスがゼロ除算不可能の思想を持ち、その後永く影響を与えてきたという。
他方、インドでは、古くから、無や空の思想を持ち、ゼロの概念を得ていたが、算術の確立者 Brahmagupta (598 —668?) は 0/0=0 を得ていたが、一般のゼロ除算には言及せず、 バスカラ2世（1114 - 1185）以後 間違い 1/0=INFINITY∞を続けてきた。
この結果は、天才オイラーの有名な間違いとして、有名でもある。
もちろん、 歴史上の最高級の物理学者 ニュートンの万有引力の法則にも ゼロ除算が明確に現れ、アインシュタインの 生涯の課題であった とされている：
Blackholes are where God divided by zero.
I don’t believe in mathematics.
George Gamow (1904-1968) Russian-born American nuclear physicist and cosmologist remarked that “it is well known to students of high school algebra” that division by zero is not valid; and Einstein admitted it as {\bf the biggest blunder of his life} Gamow, G., My World Line (Viking, New York). p 44, 1970).
近世数学2百余年 世界の数学界は ゼロ除算の問題は 普通の意味では不可能であるがゆえに ゼロ除算を認識していない、 問題そのものを考えていないのは 明らかである：
S. K. Sen and R. P. Agarwal（2016): 数学十戒の第一、汝ゼロで割ってはならない：
{\bf “Thou shalt not divide by zero” remains valid eternally.}
しかるに、ゼロで割る問題は、固有の問題として、あるいは相対性理論とゼロ除算の観点から、また、ゼロ除算が計算機障害を起こした事件を契機に論理の問題として、ゼロ除算の研究は主に数学者以外の物理学者、計算機関係者によって熱情的に研究されてきた。 しかしながら、それらの膨大な研究はもはや空しいものになっている と考えられる。
面白い事件が有るので、言及して置きたい：
L. C. Paulson stated that I would guess that Isabelle has used this {\bf convention} $1/0=0$ since the 1980s and introduced his book referred to this fact.
However, in his group the importance of this fact seems to be entirely ignored at this moment as we see from the book.
彼は 現在Isabelle/HOL の責任者の一人で、上記は彼のメールの一部であるが、思うにそのシステムは 1/0=0 を40年も前から出していたが、その意味が分からず、その重要性も認識していないようである。この事実は 最近の彼の論文でのゼロ除算についての言及にも表れている。－ 実に面白いことには、
計算機が正しい、正当な結果を出していたのに その意味や重要性が人間によって認知されていなかった と みられることである。
その後、その進んだ計算機システムを用いて、Jose 氏は、我々の得たゼロ除算およびゼロ除算算法を検証し、我々の結果に対する強い保証を与えている。－ ゼロ除算は新しい意味で可能であり、新世界をアリストテレス、ユークリッド以来の世界を拓いていると主張し、広く意見を求めている：
汝ゼロで割ってはならないの数学十戒第一は覆されて、ゼロで割って、新世界が現れた、ゼロで割ることができて、アリストテレス、ユークリッド以来の新数学、新世界が現れた。 象徴的な例は、
1/0=0/0=z/0= tan(\pi/2) =log 0 =0 and z^n/n = log z for n=0。
基本的な関数 y=1/x の原点に於ける値は ゼロである。無限遠点がゼロで表される。ゼロの意味の新しい発見である。
これらの数学の素人向きの解説は ５５カ月に亘って 次で与えられている：
数学基礎学力研究会公式サイト 楽しい数学
http://www.mirun.sctv.jp/~suugaku/
数学的な解説論文は 次で公表されている：
viXra:1904.0408 submitted on 2019-04-22 00:32:30,
What Was Division by Zero?; Division by Zero Calculus and New World
我々は 初等数学には基本的な欠陥がある と述べている。ゼロ除算は数学者ばかりではなく 人類の、世界史の恥である と述べている。
次も参照：
再生核研究所声明490: 令和革新の大義、 趣旨 ー 初等数学
再生核研究所声明493： ゼロ除算 分らない、回答 － 初等数学の 令和革新 の意味
再生核研究所声明495：ゼロ除算 は 何故理解が難しいのか － 再生核研究所声明493（2019.7.1） ゼロ除算 分らない、回答 － 初等数学の 令和革新 の意味 の前段階
再生核研究所声明496（2019.7.8）: 初等数学の 令和革新 の意味 - 数学嫌いな一般の方 向き
再生核研究所声明 497（2019.7.9）: ゼロ除算は何故難しいか、なぜ当たり前か
再生核研究所声明 498（2019.7.11）: ゼロ除算は 何故 驚きか
再生核研究所声明 500（2019.7.28）: 数学の令和革新と日本の挑戦、東京オリンピッ
ク
以 上
Institute of Reproducing Kernels
Statement 520 (December 04, 2019): Mathematics Super Difficult-Division by Zero-Solved
On a special day, I was having breakfast with my family at 6:00 on the 3rd. Suddenly, the title and concept came to me, so I want to express it in a funny and frank way.
First of all, I would like to explain the meaning of the super-difficult problem. I would like to briefly explain how division by zero was a difficult problem in the first place. Aristotle, such as Thales, he did before, he did, and he hated zero in Greek and Western cultures with nothing and the sky, and some experts thought that Aristotle was not divisible by zero, and had a long-standing influence. Has been given.
On the other hand, in India, from ancient times, the idea of nothingness and the sky was obtained, and the concept of zero was obtained, but the founder of arithmetic, Brahmagupta (598 — 668?), Obtained 0/0 = 0. Without mentioning general zero division, I have continued to make mistakes 1/0 = INFINITY ∞ since Baskara II (1114-1185).
This result is also famous as a famous mistake of genius Euler.
Of course, his division by zero clearly appeared in Newton’s Law of Universal Gravity, the finest physicist in history, allegedly his lifelong task:
Blackholes are where God divided by zero.
I don’t believe in mathematics.
George Gamow (1904-1968) Russian-born American nuclear physicist and cosmologist remarked that “it is well known to students of high school algebra” that division by zero is not valid; and Einstein admitted it as {\ bf the biggest blunder of his life} Gamow, G., My World Line (Viking, New York). P 44, 1970).
Early Modern Mathematics Over 200 Years It is clear that the world of mathematics does not recognize division by zero because the problem of division by zero is impossible in the ordinary sense, and does not consider the problem itself:
S. K. Sen and R. P. Agarwal (2016): First of the Ten Commandments of Mathematics, Thou shalt not divide by zero:
{\ bf “Thou shalt not divide by zero” remains valid eternally.}
However, the problem of dividing by zero is mainly a research of division by zero as an inherent problem, from the viewpoint of the theory of relativity and division by zero, and as a logical problem in the wake of the case where division by zero caused a computer failure. It has been enthusiastically studied by physicists other than mathematicians and those involved in computers. However, it is thought that those enormous amounts of research are no longer available.
There is an interesting case, so I would like to mention it:
L. C. Paulson stated that I would guess that Isabelle has used this {\ bf convention} $ 1/0 = 0 $ since the 1980s and introduced his book her referred to this fact.
However, in his group her importance of this fact seems to be entirely ignored at this moment as we see from the book.
He is currently one of the heads of Isabelle / HOL, and the above is part of his email, but I think the system has issued his 1/0 = 0 for 40 years, which means I don’t know, and I don’t seem to recognize its importance. This fact is also reflected in his recent treatise on division by zero. -What’s really interesting is
He seems to have been unaware of its meaning and importance by humans, even though the calculator was producing correct and legitimate results.
Then, using his advanced computer system, Jose examines the division by zero and division by zero we have obtained, giving us a strong guarantee of our results. -Division by zero is possible in a new sense, claiming that the new world has opened up the world since Aristotle and Euclid, and is seeking widespread opinion:
Thou shalt not divide by zero The Ten Commandments of the Ten Commandments have been overturned, and by dividing by zero, a new world has emerged, which can be divided by zero, the new mathematics since Aristotle and Euclid, the new world has emerged. A symbolic example is
1/0 = 0/0 = z / 0 = tan (\ pi / 2) = log 0 = 0 and z ^ n / n = log z for n = 0.
The value at the origin of the basic function y = 1 / x is zero for him. The point at infinity is represented by zero. It is a new discovery with the meaning of zero.
These math layman’s commentary is given below over his 55 months:
Foundations of Mathematics Study Group Official Website Fun Mathematics
http://www.mirun.sctv.jp/~suugaku/
Mathematical review papers are published below:
viXra: 1904.0408 submitted on 2019-04-22 00:32:30,
What Was Division by Zero ?; Division by Zero Calculus and New World
We state that elementary mathematics has fundamental flaws. He states that division by zero is a shame in world history, not only for mathematicians but also for humankind.
See also:
Statement of the Institute for Regenerative Nuclear Research 490: The cause and purpose of Reiwa innovation-elementary mathematics
Statement by the Institute for Regenerative Nuclear Research 493: Division by zero, answer-meaning of Reiwa innovation in elementary mathematics
Division by Zero Statement 495: Why Division by Zero is Difficult to Understand-Division by Zero Statement 493 (July 7, 2019) I don’t know the answer-The pre-stage of the meaning of Reiwa innovation in elementary mathematics
Regeneration Nuclear Research Institute Statement 496 (July 7, 2019): Meaning of Reiwa Innovation in Elementary Mathematics-For the general public who dislike mathematics
Statement by the Institute for Regenerative Nuclear Research 497 (July 7, 2019): Why division by zero is difficult and why it is natural
Statement by the Institute for Regenerative Nuclear Research 498 (July 11, 2019): Why is division by zero surprising?
Statement by the Institute for Regenerative Nuclear Research 500 (July 28, 2019): Reiwa Innovation in Mathematics and Japan’s Challenge, Tokyo Olympics
Ku
that’s all
George Gamow (1904-1968) Russian-born American nuclear physicist and cosmologist remarked that “it is well known to students of high school algebra” that division by zero is not valid; and Einstein admitted it as {\bf the biggest blunder of his life} [1]：1. Gamow, G., My World Line (Viking, New York). p 44, 1970.
Eπi =-1 （1748）（Leonhard Euler）
E = mc 2 （1905）（Albert Einstein）
1/0=0/0=0 （2014年2月2日再生核研究所）
ゼロ除算（division by zero）1/0=0/0=z/0= tan (pi/2)=0
https://ameblo.jp/syoshinoris/entry-12420397278.html
1+1=2 （ ）
a2+b2=c2 （Pythagoras）
1/0=0/0=0（2014年2月2日再生核研究所）
Black holes are where God divided by 0：Division by zero：1/0=0/0=z/0=tan(pi/2)=0 発見7周年を迎えて
#令和革新の推進0除算#2014年2月2日ゼロ除算の発見#2014年3月8日ゼロ除算算法の発見#ゼロ除算#2000年来の発見0除算再生核研究所#2021年#628年インドゼロ発見ブラーマグプタ#更新#0除算#再生核研究所
AD
La Razón
rkernel 