With my half
's worth of basic university level maths
, I will tentatively
make the argument
are invalid. I base this on the fact that the mathematical smallprint
has not been taken into account. That's right, in today's dodgey world even mathematics has smallprint
The fundamental laws regarding variable
s being operated on by zero
that are used in the the first
solution have the condition that the variable itself can't be zero:
0/x = 0 For all x where x != 0
x/x = 1 For all x where x != 0
x/0 = infinity for all x where x != 0
So the only viable solution is Four, undefined. The damn thing's meaningless. There is probably more smallprint involving complex numbers but it's irrelevant (I hope) and I'll be damned if i know it. I'm also probably failing my course (Intro to Calculus and Linear Algebra) so by no means take this as the be all and end all.
Bob9000 I believe you're idea follows the same idea of the proof that 1=2, which is obviously flawed in some way (Look if it isn't then well... I'll be more than happy to concede to you as the universe collapses on our heads.