this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
894 points (99.1% liked)
memes
21439 readers
2827 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Dividing by zero is well understood and sometimes even well defined.
That's a stretch.
We know the limit of it and on a Riemann sphere it is defined as infinity.
We know the limit of a/x as x --> 0 if a ≠ 0.
The limit is different if a = 0.
The limit of the division function under certain conditions is not the same as division - division has a discontinuity at 0 which is expressing the same thing.
Defining division by zero only works if you don't care to preserve the field axioms, which is often inconvenient and so not done. The Riemann sphere is not a field, and fairly niche in the context of mere division, so I stand by my accusation of this being misleading.
The policy of not defining division by zero to preserve the cancellation law is the most sensible default.