On 10/7/2013 4:56 AM, David Bernier wrote: > On 10/07/2013 03:21 AM, Robin Chapman wrote: >> On 07/10/2013 04:34, Hetware wrote: >>> On 9/30/2013 4:03 AM, Robin Chapman wrote: >> >>>> Hetware: 0/0 = 3 >>>> >>>> Ciekaw: 0/0 = 1 >>>> >>>> Any more entrants? >>>> >>> >>> To be correct; Hetware: 0/0 = 1 (under certain circumstances). >> >> Not according to your original posting in this thread :-( > > Heware, if 0/0 = 1, then 0/0 = (100*0)/0 = 100*(0/0) = 100*1 = 100. > > So, assuming 0/0 = 1, we find that 1 = 100 :( > > David >
That statement came with a qualification. That is, given a function defined by f(t) = (t^2-9)/(t-3), I could assume (t-3)/(t-3) = 1, even where t=3. I've already shown that a modified version of that proposition does make sense.
Given a function f(t) continuous for all real numbers t and defined by (t^2-9)/(t-3) everywhere the expression is meaningful, that function is identical to g(t) = (t+3). My original mistake was to assume continuity after using (t^2-9)/(t-3) to define the entire function.