【日本】米一流科学誌「サイエンス」が日本の論文不正を特集「嘘の大波」 撤回論文数上位10人の半数は日本人
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Announcement 179: Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics\\
}
\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\
Kawauchi-cho, 5-1648-16,\\
Kiryu 376-0041, Japan\\
\date{\today}
\maketitle
{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, we shall introduce the zero division $z/0=0$. The result is a definite one and it is fundamental in mathematics.
\bigskip
\section{Introduction}
%\label{sect1}
By a natural extension of the fractions
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a}
\end{equation}
for any complex numbers $a$ and $b$, we, recently, found the surprising result, for any complex number $b$
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{0}=0,
\end{equation}
incidentally in \cite{s} by the Tikhonov regularization for the Hadamard product inversions for matrices, and we discussed their properties and gave several physical interpretations on the general fractions in \cite{kmsy} for the case of real numbers. The result is a very special case for general fractional functions in \cite{cs}.
The division by zero has a long and mysterious story over the world (see, for example, google site with division by zero) with its physical viewpoints since the document of zero in India on AD 628, however,
Sin-Ei, Takahasi (\cite{taka}) (see also \cite{kmsy}) established a simple and decisive interpretation (1.2) by analyzing some full extensions of fractions and by showing the complete characterization for the property (1.2). His result will show that our mathematics says that the result (1.2) should be accepted as a natural one:
\bigskip
{\bf Proposition. }{\it Let F be a function from ${\bf C }\times {\bf C }$ to ${\bf C }$ such that
$$
F (b, a)F (c, d)= F (bc, ad)
$$
for all
$$
a, b, c, d \in {\bf C }
$$
and
$$
F (b, a) = \frac {b}{a }, \quad a, b \in {\bf C }, a \ne 0.
$$
Then, we obtain, for any $b \in {\bf C } $
$$
F (b, 0) = 0.
$$
}
\medskip
\section{What are the fractions $ b/a$?}
For many mathematicians, the division $b/a$ will be considered as the inverse of product;
that is, the fraction
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a}
\end{equation}
is defined as the solution of the equation
\begin{equation}
a\cdot x= b.
\end{equation}
The idea and the equation (2.2) show that the division by zero is impossible, with a strong conclusion. Meanwhile, the problem has been a long and old question:
As a typical example of the division by zero, we shall recall the fundamental law by Newton:
\begin{equation}
F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}
\end{equation}
for two masses $m_1, m_2$ with a distance $r$ and for a constant $G$. Of course,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{r \to +0} F =\infty,
\end{equation}
however, in our fraction
\begin{equation}
F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{0} = 0.
\end{equation}
\medskip
Now, we shall introduce an another approach. The division $b/a$ may be defined {\bf independently of the product}. Indeed, in Japan, the division $b/a$ ; $b$ {\bf raru} $a$ ({\bf jozan}) is defined as how many $a$ exists in $b$, this idea comes from subtraction $a$ repeatedly. (Meanwhile, product comes from addition).
In Japanese language for "division", there exists such a concept independently of product.
H. Michiwaki and his 6 years old girl said for the result $ 100/0=0$ that the result is clear, from the meaning of the fractions independently the concept of product and they said:
$100/0=0$ does not mean that $100= 0 \times 0$. Meanwhile, many mathematicians had a confusion for the result.
Her understanding is reasonable and may be acceptable:
$100/2=50 \quad$ will mean that we divide 100 by 2, then each will have 50.
$100/10=10 \quad$ will mean that we divide 100 by10, then each will have 10.
$100/0=0 \quad$ will mean that we do not divide 100, and then nobody will have at all and so 0.
Furthermore, she said then the rest is 100; that is, mathematically;
$$
100 = 0\cdot 0 + 100.
$$
Now, all the mathematicians may accept the division by zero $100/0=0$ with natural feelings as a trivial one?
\medskip
For simplicity, we shall consider the numbers on non-negative real numbers. We wish to define the division (or fraction) $b/a$ following the usual procedure for its calculation, however, we have to take care for the division by zero:
The first principle, for example, for $100/2 $ we shall consider it as follows:
$$
100-2-2-2-,...,-2.
$$
How may times can we subtract $2$? At this case, it is 50 times and so, the fraction is $50$.
The second case, for example, for $3/2$ we shall consider it as follows:
$$
3 - 2 = 1
$$
and the rest (remainder) is $1$, and for the rest $1$, we multiple $10$,
then we consider similarly as follows:
$$
10-2-2-2-2-2=0.
$$
Therefore $10/2=5$ and so we define as follows:
$$
\frac{3}{2} =1 + 0.5 = 1.5.
$$
By these procedures, for $a \ne 0$ we can define the fraction $b/a$, usually. Here we do not need the concept of product. Except the zero division, all the results for fractions are valid and accepted.
Now, we shall consider the zero division, for example, $100/0$. Since
$$
100 - 0 = 100,
$$
that is, by the subtraction $100 - 0$, 100 does not decrease, so we can not say we subtract any from $100$. Therefore, the subtract number should be understood as zero; that is,
$$
\frac{100}{0} = 0.
$$
We can understand this: the division by $0$ means that it does not divide $100$ and so, the result is $0$.
Similarly, we can see that
$$
\frac{0}{0} =0.
$$
As a conclusion, we should define the zero divison as, for any $b$
$$
\frac{b}{0} =0.
$$
See \cite{kmsy} for the details.
\medskip
\section{In complex analysis}
We thus should consider, for any complex number $b$, as (1.2);
that is, for the mapping
\begin{equation}
w = \frac{1}{z},
\end{equation}
the image of $z=0$ is $w=0$. This fact seems to be a curious one in connection with our well-established popular image for the point at infinity on the Riemann sphere.
However, we shall recall the elementary function
\begin{equation}
W(z) = \exp \frac{1}{z}
\end{equation}
$$
= 1 + \frac{1}{1! z} + \frac{1}{2! z^2} + \frac{1}{3! z^3} + \cdot \cdot \cdot .
$$
The function has an essential singularity around the origin. When we consider (1.2), meanwhile, surprisingly enough, we have:
\begin{equation}
W(0) = 1.
\end{equation}
{\bf The point at infinity is not a number} and so we will not be able to consider the function (3.2) at the zero point $z = 0$, meanwhile, we can consider the value $1$ as in (3.3) at the zero point $z = 0$. How do we consider these situations?
In the famous standard textbook on Complex Analysis, L. V. Ahlfors (\cite{ahlfors}) introduced the point at infinity as a number and the Riemann sphere model as well known, however, our interpretation will be suitable as a number. We will not be able to accept the point at infinity as a number.
As a typical result, we can derive the surprising result: {\it At an isolated singular point of an analytic function, it takes a definite value }{\bf with a natural meaning.} As the important applications for this result, the extension formula of functions with analytic parameters may be obtained and singular integrals may be interpretated with the division by zero, naturally (\cite{msty}).
\bigskip
\section{Conclusion}
The division by zero $b/0=0$ is possible and the result is naturally determined, uniquely.
The result does not contradict with the present mathematics - however, in complex analysis, we need only to change a little presentation for the pole; not essentially, because we did not consider the division by zero, essentially.
The common understanding that the division by zero is impossible should be changed with many text books and mathematical science books. The definition of the fractions may be introduced by {\it the method of Michiwaki} in the elementary school, even.
Should we teach the beautiful fact, widely?:
For the elementary graph of the fundamental function
$$
y = f(x) = \frac{1}{x},
$$
$$
f(0) = 0.
$$
The result is applicable widely and will give a new understanding for the universe ({\bf Announcement 166}).
\medskip
If the division by zero $b/0=0$ is not introduced, then it seems that mathematics is incomplete in a sense, and by the intoduction of the division by zero, mathematics will become complete in a sense and perfectly beautiful.
\bigskip
section{Remarks}
For the procedure of the developing of the division by zero and for some general ideas on the division by zero, we presented the following announcements in Japanese:
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 148} (2014.2.12): $100/0=0, 0/0=0$ -- by a natural extension of fractions -- A wish of the God
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 154} (2014.4.22): A new world: division by zero, a curious world, a new idea
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 157} (2014.5.8): We wish to know the idea of the God for the division by zero; why the infinity and zero point are coincident?
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 161} (2014.5.30): Learning from the division by zero, sprits of mathematics and of looking for the truth
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 163} (2014.6.17): The division by zero, an extremely pleasant mathematics - shall we look for the pleasant division by zero: a proposal for a fun club looking for the division by zero.
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 166} (2014.6.29): New general ideas for the universe from the viewpoint of the division by zero
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 171} (2014.7.30): The meanings of product and division -- The division by zero is trivial from the own sense of the division independently of the concept of product
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 176} (2014.8.9): Should be changed the education of the division by zero
\bigskip
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{ahlfors}
L. V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.
\bibitem{cs}
L. P. Castro and S.Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.
\bibitem{kmsy}
S. Koshiba, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M. Yamane,
An interpretation of the division by zero z/0=0 without the concept of product
(note).
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Vol. 27, No 2 (2014), pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{msty}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, M. Takagi and M. Yamada,
A new concept for the point at infinity and the division by zero z/0=0
(note).
\bibitem{s}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. Vol.4 No.2 (2014), 87-95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{taka}
S.-E. Takahasi,
{On the identities $100/0=0$ and $ 0/0=0$}
(note).
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operators on the real and complex fields. (submitted)
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
For the procedure of the developing of the division by zero and for some general ideas on the division by zero, we presented the following announcements in Japanese:
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 148} (2014.2.12): $100/0=0, 0/0=0$ -- by a natural extension of fractions -- A wish of the God
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 154} (2014.4.22): A new world: division by zero, a curious world, a new idea
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 157} (2014.5.8): We wish to know the idea of the God for the division by zero; why the infinity and zero point are coincident?
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 161} (2014.5.30): Learning from the division by zero, sprits of mathematics and of looking for the truth
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 163} (2014.6.17): The division by zero, an extremely pleasant mathematics - shall we look for the pleasant division by zero: a proposal for a fun club looking for the division by zero.
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 166} (2014.6.29): New general ideas for the universe from the viewpoint of the division by zero
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 171} (2014.7.30): The meanings of product and division -- The division by zero is trivial from the own sense of the division independently of the concept of product
\medskip
{\bf Announcement 176} (2014.8.9): Should be changed the education of the division by zero
\bigskip
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{ahlfors}
L. V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.
\bibitem{cs}
L. P. Castro and S.Saitoh, Fractional functions and their representations, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.
\bibitem{kmsy}
S. Koshiba, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M. Yamane,
An interpretation of the division by zero z/0=0 without the concept of product
(note).
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. Vol. 27, No 2 (2014), pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{msty}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, M. Takagi and M. Yamada,
A new concept for the point at infinity and the division by zero z/0=0
(note).
\bibitem{s}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. Vol.4 No.2 (2014), 87-95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{taka}
S.-E. Takahasi,
{On the identities $100/0=0$ and $ 0/0=0$}
(note).
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operators on the real and complex fields. (submitted)
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
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
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
〔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
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
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
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{url}
%%%%%%% �}�ԍ��̃J�E���^
\newcounter{num}
\setcounter{num}{0}
%\setcounter{prop}{1}
%\newcommand{\Fg}[1][]{\thenum}
\newcommand\Ra{r_{\rm A}}
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Announcement 448:\\ Division by Zero;\\
Funny History and New World}
\author{再生核研究所}
\date{2018.08.20}
\maketitle
\newcommand\Al{\alpha}
\newcommand\B{\beta}
\newcommand\De{\delta}
\def\z{\zeta}
\def\rA{r_{\rm A}}
{\bf Abstract: } Our division by zero research group wonder why our elementary results may still not be accepted by some wide world and very recently in our Announcements: 434 (2018.7.28),
437 (2018.7.30),
438(2018.8.6), \\
441(2018.8.9),
442(2018.8.10),
443(2018.8.11),
444(2018.8.14),
in Japanese, we stated their reasons and the importance of our elementary results. Here, we would like to state their essences. As some essential reasons, we found fundamental misunderstandings on the division by zero and so we would like to state the essences and the importance of our new results to human beings over mathematics.
We hope that:
close the mysterious and long history of division by zero that may be considered as a symbol of the stupidity of the human race and open the new world since Aristotle-Eulcid.
From the funny history of the division by zero, we will be able to realize that
human beings are full of prejudice and prejudice, and are narrow-minded, essentially.
\medskip
\section{Division by zero}
The division by zero with mysterious and long history was indeed trivial and clear as in the followings:
\medskip
By the concept of the Moore-Penrose generalized solution of the fundamental equation $az=b$, the division by zero was trivial and clear as $b/0=0$ in the {\bf generalized fraction} that is defined by the generalized solution of the equation $az=b$.
Note, in particular, that there exists a uniquely determined solution for any case of the equation $az=b$ containing the case $a=0$.
People, of course, consider as the division $b/a$ that it is the solution of the equation $ az =b$ and if $a=0$ then $0 \cdot z =0$ and so, for $b\ne0$ we can not consider the fraction $a/b$. We have been considered that the division by zero $b/0$ is impossible for mysteriously long years, since the document of zero in India in AD 628. In particular, note that Brahmagupta (598 -668 ?) established four arithmetic operations by introducing $0$ and at the same time he defined as $0/0=0$ in Brhmasphuasiddhnta. Our world history, however, stated that his definition $0/0=0$ is wrong over 1300 years, but, we will see that his definition is right and suitable. However, he did not give its reason and did not consider the importance case $1/0$ and the general fractions $b/0$. The division by zero was a symbol for {\bf impossibility} or to consider the division by zero was {\bf not permitted}. For this simple and clear conclusion, we did not definitely consider more on the division by zero. However, we see many and many formulas appearing the zero in denominators, one simple and typical example is in the function $w=1/z$ for $z=0$.
We did not consider the function at the origin $z=0$.
In this case, however, the serious interest happens in many physical problems and also in computer sciences, as we know.
When we can not find the solution of the fundamental equation $az=b$, it is fairly clear to consider the Moore-Penrose generalized solution in mathematics. Its basic idea and beautiful mathematics will be definite.
Therefore, we should consider the generalized fractions following the Moore-Penrose generalized inverse. Therefore, with its meaning and definition we should consider that $b/0=0$.
It will be very curious that we know very well the Moore-Penrose generalized inverse as a very fundamental and important concept, however, we did not consider the simplest case $ az =b$.
Its reason may be considered as follows: We will consider or imagine that the fraction $1/0$ may be like infinity or ideal one.
For the fundamental function $W =1/ z $ we did not consider any value at the origin $z = 0$. Many and many people consider its value by the limiting like $+\infty $ and $- \infty$ or the
point at infinity as $\infty$. However, their basic idea comes from {\bf continuity} with the common sense or
based on the basic idea of Aristotle. --
For the related Greece philosophy, see \cite{a,b,c}. However, as the division by zero we have to consider its value of
the function $W =1 /z$ as zero at $z = 0$. We will see that this new definition is valid widely in
mathematics and mathematical sciences, see (\cite{mos,osm}) for example. Therefore, the division by zero will give great impacts to calculus, Euclidian geometry, analytic geometry, complex analysis and the theory of differential equations in an undergraduate level and furthermore to our basic ideas for the space and universe.
For the extended complex plane, we consider its stereographic projection mapping as the Riemann sphere and the point at infinity is realized as the north pole in the Alexsandroff's one point compactification.
The Riemann sphere model gives a beautiful and complete realization of the extended complex plane through the stereographic projection mapping and the mapping has beautiful properties like isogonal (equiangular) and circle to circle correspondence (circle transformation). Therefore, the Riemann sphere is a very classical concept \cite{ahlfors}.
\medskip
Now, with the division by zero we have to admit the strong discontinuity at the point at infinity. To accept this strong discontinuity seems to be very difficult, and therefore we showed many and many examples for giving the evidences over $800$ items.
\medskip
We back to our general fractions $1/0=0/0=z/0=0$ for its importances.
\medskip
H. Michiwaki and his 6 years old daughter Eko Michiwaki stated that in about three weeks after the discovery of the division by zero that
division by zero is trivial and clear from the concept of repeated subtraction and they showed the detailed interpretation of the general fractions. Their method is a basic one and it will give a good introduction of division and their calculation method of divisions.
We can say that division by zero, say $100/0$ means that we do not divide $100$ and so the number of the divided ones is zero.
\medskip
Furthermore,
recall the uniqueness theorem by S. Takahasi on the division by zero:
\medskip
{\bf Proposition 1.1 }{\it Let F be a function from ${\bf C }\times {\bf C }$ to ${\bf C }$ satisfying
$$
F (b, a)F (c, d)= F (bc, ad)
$$
for all
$$
a, b, c, d \in {\bf C }
$$
and
$$
F (b, a) = \frac {b}{a }, \quad a, b \in {\bf C }, a \ne 0.
$$
Then, we obtain, for any $b \in {\bf C } $
$$
F (b, 0) = 0.
$$
}
Note that the complete proof of this proposition is simply given by 2 or 3 lines.
In the long mysterious history of the division by zero, this proposition seems to be decisive.
Indeed, Takahasi's assumption for the product property should be accepted for any generalization of fraction (division). Without the product property, we will not be able to consider any reasonable fraction (division).
Following Proposition 1.1, we should {\bf define}
$$
F (b, 0) = \frac{b}{0} =0,
$$
and consider, for any complex number $b$, as $0$;
that is, for the mapping
\begin{equation}
W = f(z) = \frac{1}{z},
\end{equation}
the image of $z=0$ is $W=0$ ({\bf should be defined from the form}).
\medskip
Furthermore,
the simple field structure containing division by zero was established by M. Yamada.
\medskip
In addition, for the fundamental function $f(z) = 1/z$, note that
the function is odd function
$$
f(z) = - f(-z)
$$
and if the function may be extended as an odd function at the origin $z=0$, then the identity $f(0) = 1/0 =0$ has to be satisfied. Further, if the equation
$$
\frac{1}{z} =0
$$
has a solution, then the solution has to be $z=0$.
\medskip
\section{Division by zero calculus}
As the number system containing the division by zero, the Yamada field structure is complete.
However, for applications of the division by zero to {\bf functions}, we need the concept of the division by zero calculus for the sake of uniquely determinations of the results and for other reasons.
For example, for the typical linear mapping
\begin{equation}
W = \frac{z - i}{z + i},
\end{equation}
it gives a conformal mapping on $\{{\bf C} \setminus \{-i\}\}$ onto $\{{\bf C} \setminus \{1\}\}$ in one to one and from \begin{equation}
W = 1 + \frac{-2i}{ z - (-i)},
\end{equation}
we see that $-i$ corresponds to $1$ and so the function maps the whole $\{{\bf C} \}$ onto $\{{\bf C} \}$ in one to one.
Meanwhile, note that for
\begin{equation}
W = (z - i) \cdot \frac{1}{z + i},
\end{equation}
if we enter $z= -i$ in the way
\begin{equation}
[(z - i)]_{z =-i} \cdot \left[ \frac{1}{z + i}\right]_{z =-i} = (-2i) \cdot 0= 0,
\end{equation}
we have another value.
\medskip
In many cases, the above two results will have practical meanings and so, we will need to consider many ways for the application of the division by zero and we will need to check the results obtained, in some practical viewpoints. We referred to this delicate problem with many examples.
Therefore, we will introduce the division by zero calculus that give important values for functions. For any Laurent expansion around $z=a$,
\begin{equation}
f(z) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} C_n (z - a)^n + C_0 + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} C_n (z - a)^n,
\end{equation}
we obtain the identity, by the division by zero
\begin{equation}
f(a) = C_0.
\end{equation}
Note that here, there is no problem on any convergence of the expansion (2.5) at the point $z = a$, because all the terms $(z - a)^n$ are zero at $z=a$ for $n \ne 0$.
\medskip
For the correspondence (2.6) for the function $f(z)$, we will call it {\bf the division by zero calculus}. By considering the formal derivatives in (2.5), we {\bf can define any order derivatives of the function} $f$ at the singular point $a$; that is,
$$
f^{(n)}(a) = n! C_n.
$$
\medskip
{\bf Apart from the motivation, we define the division by zero calculus by (2.6).}
With this assumption, we can obtain many new results and new ideas. However, for this assumption we have to check the results obtained whether they are reasonable or not. By this idea, we can avoid any logical problems. -- In this point, the division by zero calculus may be considered as an axiom.
\medskip
This paragraph is very important. Our division by zero is just definition and the division by zero is an assumption. Only with the assumption and definition of the division by zero calculus, we can create and enjoy our new mathematics. Therefore, the division by zero calculus may be considered as a new axiom.
Of course, its strong motivations were given. We did not consider any value {\bf at the singular point} $a$ for the Laurent expansion (2.5). Therefore, our division by zero is a new mathematics entirely and isolated singular points are a new world for our mathematics.
We had been considered properties of analytic functions {\bf around their isolated singular points.}
The typical example of the division zero calculus is $\tan (\pi/2) = 0$ and the result gives great impacts to analysis and geometry.
See the references for the materials.
\medskip
For an identity, when we multiply zero, we obtain the zero identity that is a trivial.
We will consider the division by zero to an equation.
For example, for the simple example for the line equation on the $x, y$ plane
$$
ax + by + c=0
$$
we have, formally
$$
x + \frac{by + c}{a} =0,
$$
and so, by the division by zero, we have, for $a=0$, the reasonable result
$$
x = 0.
$$
However, from
$$
\frac{ax + by}{c} + 1 =0,
$$
for $c=0$, we have the contradiction, by the division by zero
$$
1 =0.
$$
For this case, we can consider that
$$
\frac{ax + by}{c} + \frac{c}{c} =0,
$$
that is always valid. {\bf In this sense, we can divide an equation by zero.}
\section{Conclusion}
Apparently, the common sense on the division by zero with a long and mysterious history is wrong and our basic idea on the space around the point at infinity is also wrong since Euclid. On the gradient or on derivatives we have a great missing since $\tan (\pi/2) = 0$. Our mathematics is also wrong in elementary mathematics on the division by zero.
We have to arrange globally our modern mathematics with our division by zero in our undergraduate level.
We have to change our basic ideas for our space and world.
We have to change globally our textbooks and scientific books on the division by zero.
From the mysterious history of the division by zero, we will be able to study what are human beings and about our narrow-minded.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\begin{thebibliography}{10}
\bibitem{ahlfors}
L. V. Ahlfors, Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1966.
\bibitem{ass}
H. Akca, S. Pinelas and S. Saitoh, The Division by Zero z/0=0 and Differential Equations (materials).
International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat. Vol. 57; Issue No. 4; Year 2018, ISSN 0973-1377 (Print), ISSN 0973-7545 (Online).
\bibitem{kmsy}
M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,
New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,
Int. J. Appl. Math. {\bf 27} (2014), no 2, pp. 191-198, DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.
\bibitem{ms16}
T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,
Matrices and division by zero $z/0=0$,
Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory, {\bf 6}(2016), 51-58
Published Online June 2016 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/alamt
\\ http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/alamt.2016.62007.
\bibitem{mms18}
T. Matsuura, H. Michiwaki and S. Saitoh,
$\log 0= \log \infty =0$ and applications. Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics. {\bf 230} (2018), 293-305.
\bibitem{msy}
H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh and M.Yamada,
Reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$. IJAPM International J. of Applied Physics and Math. {\bf 6}(2015), 1--8. http://www.ijapm.org/show-63-504-1.html
\bibitem{mos}
H. Michiwaki, H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Division by Zero $z/0 = 0$ in Euclidean Spaces,
International Journal of Mathematics and Computation, {\bf 2}8(2017); Issue 1, 1-16.
\bibitem{osm}
H. Okumura, S. Saitoh and T. Matsuura, Relations of $0$ and $\infty$,
Journal of Technology and Social Science (JTSS), {\bf 1}(2017), 70-77.
\bibitem{os}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh, The Descartes circles theorem and division by zero calculus. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.04961 (2017.11.14).
\bibitem{o}
H. Okumura, Wasan geometry with the division by 0. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.06947 International Journal of Geometry.
\bibitem{os18april}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Harmonic Mean and Division by Zero,
Dedicated to Professor Josip Pe$\check{c}$ari$\acute{c}$ on the occasion of his 70th birthday, Forum Geometricorum, {\bf 18} (2018), 155—159.
\bibitem{os18}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Remarks for The Twin Circles of Archimedes in a Skewed Arbelos by H. Okumura and M. Watanabe, Forum Geometricorum, {\bf 18}(2018), 97-100.
\bibitem{os18e}
H. Okumura and S. Saitoh,
Applications of the division by zero calculus to Wasan geometry.
GLOBAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH ON CLASSICAL AND MODERN GEOMETRIES” (GJARCMG)(in press).
\bibitem{ps18}
S. Pinelas and S. Saitoh,
Division by zero calculus and differential equations. Differential and Difference Equations with Applications. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics \& Statistics. {\bf 230} (2018), 399-418.
\bibitem{s14}
S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices, Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory. {\bf 4} (2014), no. 2, 87--95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/
\bibitem{s16}
S. Saitoh, A reproducing kernel theory with some general applications,
Qian,T./Rodino,L.(eds.): Mathematical Analysis, Probability and Applications - Plenary Lectures: Isaac 2015, Macau, China, Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, {\bf 177}(2016), 151-182. (Springer)
\bibitem{s17}
S. Saitoh, Mysterious Properties of the Point at Infinity, arXiv:1712.09467 [math.GM](2017.12.17).
\bibitem{s18}
S. Saitoh, Division by Zero Calculus (Draft) (210 pages): http//okmr.yamatoblog.net/
\bibitem{ttk}
S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi, Classification of continuous fractional binary operations on the real and complex fields, Tokyo Journal of Mathematics, {\bf 38}(2015), no. 2, 369-380.
\bibitem{a}
https://philosophy.kent.edu/OPA2/sites/default/files/012001.pdf
\bibitem{b}
http://publish.uwo.ca/~jbell/The 20Continuous.pdf
\bibitem{c}
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath526/kmath526.htm
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿