So I was in the shower today...

[Radical Raccoon]

Nope. It's an asymptote. Graph y=1/x, and notice that there is no value for x=0. x=.00001 is big, x=.000000000000000001 is even bigger, but x=0 is undefined. It's a mathematical rule, that division by zero is undefined.

Why do you think x=0 is undefined? Obviously because it would be infinitely big that you couldn't graph it! But go ahead and trust whatever your graphing program says.


For instance, when talking about slopes, 1/0 would be considered undefined. Why? Because there is no Y intersection taking place to define the slope on; it is virtually a vertical line with an infinite slope, which really is what a vertical line is: no matter where you are on the Y, the X will always be the same. It's inverse, 0/1, is a perfectly straight horizontal line, which is no surprise (because they are opposites -> zero & infinity, 1/0 & 0/1, horizontal & vertical).

Anyway, infinity is really more of a concept rather than a number, but so is zero if you think about it.

[Zack]

And as soon as a particle's energy is released, it is no longer available in the same form to be moved.

Uhmmmm.... Kay.

He's right, in a sense. Since matter is just dense energy, if a particle releases ALL it's energy, it no longer exists because it was changed into energy. That's why when you have an antimatter annhilation there's a tremendous burst of energy and the two particlees you annihilated disappear; the energy is the energy that was once the matter making up the two particles, but because they touched each other and canceled out, they turned back into their pure energy form (which proceeded to spew itself all over the place).

Just imagine what would happen if we could harness matter/antimatter annihilation, or even fusion. Hey, they do it on Star Trek!

[Radical Raccoon]

Just imagine what would happen if we could harness matter/antimatter annihilation, or even fusion. Hey, they do it on Star Trek!

Zero Point Energy pwns them all.

[red_Marvin]

If you think division with 0 is valid [and infinite]:
When graphing y=1/x
For x<0 and growing towards 0, y grows to negative infinity.
For x>0 and shrinking(?) towards 0, y grows to positive infinity.
Would y, for x=0, be positively or negatively infinite?

[Radical Raccoon]

If you think division with 0 is valid [and infinite]:
When graphing y=1/x
For x<0 and growing towards 0, y grows to negative infinity.
For x>0 and shrinking(?) towards 0, y grows to positive infinity.
Would y, for x=0, be positively or negatively infinite?

It would be both: Y would exist on all possible points of the Y axis, from 0 to positive infinity, and from 0 to negative infinity.

Please, let's not debate this any further. It's not worth my time. Let's just assume that when someone's talking about infinite energy that they mean a really big number.

[red_Marvin]

Just to clarify: I didn't mean to comment on the infinite energy stuff, just wether 1/0 "should" be undefined or not.

[LooseCaboose]

Why do you think x=0 [division by] is undefined? Obviously because it would be infinitely big that you couldn't graph it! But go ahead and trust whatever your graphing program says

It depends on the mathmatical system being used, but division by zero is mostly commonly undefined, not infinite. One of the reasons for this is that if you have x / y = z then z * y = x, in the case of division by zero we have: x / 0 = z, therefore z * 0 = x. Unless x is also zero, any number you put in place of z is incorrect. Therefore division by zero does not yield infinity, or all numbers or whatever, it is undefined. Note that zero divided by itself is also undefined, since we cannot find a single value of z which satisfies z * 0 = 0. Check here and here if you don't believe me.

As far as the physics stuff goes we really need Glen back ;-).

[Zack]

If you think division with 0 is valid [and infinite]:
When graphing y=1/x
For x<0 and growing towards 0, y grows to negative infinity.
For x>0 and shrinking(?) towards 0, y grows to positive infinity.
Would y, for x=0, be positively or negatively infinite?

It would be both: Y would exist on all possible points of the Y axis, from 0 to positive infinity, and from 0 to negative infinity.

Please, let's not debate this any further. It's not worth my time. Let's just assume that when someone's talking about infinite energy that they mean a really big number.

100% wrong. The curve never intersects the Y axis, and it certainly doesn't at Y=0!
It just doesn't make sense to say that the x or y axis is intersected "at infinity." Infinity is the concept of a never-ending number, so it can never be reached.

[EDIT]LooseCaboose, here's another violation involved with division by zero. n/n=1, so if n=0, n/n=1. But 0/n always equals 0, so...n=1 or n=0. Of course it should be corrected to n/n=1, n≠0.

[Agamemnus]

there is still a massive amount of matter being pulling towards the center, thus creating pressure.

It's not being pulled towards the center. It's being pulled towards somewhere outside the center, but not in the center.

Aga - you're becoming increasingly arrogant, much like you used to a few years ago when I visited this forum more regularly, and it's starting to piss me off. I'm enjoying talking about this, but stop being a child.

There -is- pressure, because the rest of the Earth is being pulled towards the center

It's not my fault you can't understand this. I've tried so many different ways to explain it.

For the record, Newton's Law Of Gravitation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_...ravitation) is clearly written with r being the distance between the centers of mass of the objects. According to the formula, I believe I am correct.

The Earth is made up of particles that all must be factored into the formula. Considering the Earth as one object is arbitrary.

Let's make a 2D example to demonstrate this again. Let's say that you have a circle planet made entirely of one type of liquid and a solid circle enters the planet. Let's say the movement of the circle is entirely governed by gravitational forces of the planet beyond the initial entry into the "atmosphere".

So imagine it goes down towards the center from north to south. At the center, there is almost zero gravity as all particles are pulling (pull being gravitational force) at it equally. Just beyond that to the north, there is slightly more pull coming from the northern "half" than the southern half. The particle stops when there is no pull on it. As it reaches the center of the planet, the small circle slows down more and more as gravity weakens. Eventually it does the center, but the gravity is not "infinite" or even close to it because you forgot the little negative sign. Smaller gravity at the "core" = less pressure. I didn't say there wasn't pressure, I think. But less pressure because less gravity. Just because everything is moving towards the center doesn't mean there is more pressure at the center than anywhere else... it also depends on the rate of movement towards the center.

If there is little gravity it means that there is easier for particles to move around hence why the center could be a liquid or a gas. However this has nothing to do with disproving your silly notion of gravity continually increasing as you reach the center.

[Radical Raccoon]

If you think division with 0 is valid [and infinite]:
When graphing y=1/x
For x<0 and growing towards 0, y grows to negative infinity.
For x>0 and shrinking(?) towards 0, y grows to positive infinity.
Would y, for x=0, be positively or negatively infinite?

It would be both: Y would exist on all possible points of the Y axis, from 0 to positive infinity, and from 0 to negative infinity.

Please, let's not debate this any further. It's not worth my time. Let's just assume that when someone's talking about infinite energy that they mean a really big number.

100% wrong. The curve never intersects the Y axis, and it certainly doesn't at Y=0!
It just doesn't make sense to say that the x or y axis is intersected "at infinity." Infinity is the concept of a never-ending number, so it can never be reached.

[EDIT]LooseCaboose, here's another violation involved with division by zero. n/n=1, so if n=0, n/n=1. But 0/n always equals 0, so...n=1 or n=0. Of course it should be corrected to n/n=1, n≠0.

He was talking about a line, not a curve. And I never said Y intersected at infinity. A vertical line at x=0 intersects Y everywhere.

there is still a massive amount of matter being pulling towards the center, thus creating pressure.

It's not being pulled towards the center. It's being pulled towards somewhere outside the center, but not in the center.

Wrong. It is being pulled towards the center, but it is being pulled by matter outside the center, as my post stated.

Just because everything is moving towards the center doesn't mean there is more pressure at the center than anywhere else

Yes it does. Tons and tons of matter is constantly moving towards the center. It doesn't have to move fast to create more pressure: it's the weight and not the speed. Lay down and have someone softly lay an anvil on your chest. Are you not going to feel its pressure pushing down on you?

Why do you think x=0 [division by] is undefined? Obviously because it would be infinitely big that you couldn't graph it! But go ahead and trust whatever your graphing program says

It depends on the mathmatical system being used, but division by zero is mostly commonly undefined, not infinite. One of the reasons for this is that if you have x / y = z then z * y = x, in the case of division by zero we have: x / 0 = z, therefore z * 0 = x. Unless x is also zero, any number you put in place of z is incorrect. Therefore division by zero does not yield infinity, or all numbers or whatever, it is undefined. Note that zero divided by itself is also undefined, since we cannot find a single value of z which satisfies z * 0 = 0. Check here and here if you don't believe me.

As far as the physics stuff goes we really need Glen back ;-).

Damn it you've disproved me.