Home · [WikiForum] · [WikiChat] · [H*R.com] · *First time here?*

RecentChanges · StrongBadEmail · SiteUpdates · HelpDesk · Preferences

RecentChanges · StrongBadEmail · SiteUpdates · HelpDesk · Preferences

**Homestar Runner Wiki**. Editing is disabled for purposes of historical preservation.

- Even though "jillion" isn't a real number, this is true because X/X always equals one. That's basic proportions.

- Strictly speaking, that's an AVERAGE of one email every second. But if two jillion seconds never come to pass (especially if the number doesn't exist), he may never get even that first payload.

- More Nerdence: X/X is not one if X is zero. In that case it's undefined. But I suppose we can agree a jillion is more than one.

- Actually I asked my math teacher once about that, and she said 0/0 is "indeterminable" not "undefined." Apparently there is a difference. In a related story, most of these bullets will be 73373D.

- Umm, I think you mean D373373D, N3RD! PWND!!

- Umm, I think if you had seen SB Email #50, you would know what I was referencing and know that 73373D is, in fact, correct. NERD!
*WHO'S PWNED NOW?*

- Umm, I think if you had seen SB Email #50, you would know what I was referencing and know that 73373D is, in fact, correct. NERD!

- Anything divided by zero can be considered both 'indeterminable' and 'undefined' because anything divided by zero is infinity, which happens to be unquantifable. - Bockage

- Infinity may not be quantifiable, but it exists. Therefore, if you divide something (not 0) by zero, the result is infinity. - Lucio

- Bockage and Lucio, you're just wrong. Anything divided by 0 is undefined, not infinity. There is a huge difference. And 0/0 is indeterminable.

- I'm sorry, but calculus begs to differ. - Bockage

- Hmmm... I don't see how that's possible... I'll get back to you in a year when I'm done with calculus. --TehMilkman

- This is propably no mathematical correct explanation, but think about the following: If you have paid attention in physics lesson, you know that "v = s / t" meaning "Speed = Distance divided by Duration". Now, you can also write this formular like "Duration = Distance divided by Speed". This works without problems for moving objects, but what about objects that stand still? The formula would be "Duration = <something> / 0", a division by zero. But if you try this out in reality, you will encounter that you can wait for the object as long as you want, it will (of course) never arrive. In other words, the time until it arrives is Infinite. - PS

- While any nonzero real number divided by 0 is technically undefined, it's not really incorrect to think of the result as infinity as long as the potential divisors are all positive. The obvious reason for this is that if you consider the function f(x) = 1/x, the limit of f(x) as x approaches 0 from the right side is positive infinity. Similarly, if the potential divisors are all negative, it would not be incorrect to think of the result as negative infinity. The only reason that a nonzero real number divided by 0 is technically termed "undefined" is that there is an infinite discontinuity in the graph of f(x) at x = 0, since f(x) goes to positive infinity from the right side and negative infinity from the left side. This means that the two one-sided limits are not equal, meaning that the general limit does not exist. -Luke

- What the... world are you talking about? You just contradicted yourself. You said yourself, the limit of f(x)=1/x as x approaches 0
**does not exist.**You can't just pick coming from one side. This whole page is dumb.**Anything divided by 0 is undefined, unless it's 0/0 in which case it's indeterminable. Period. End --Listen to me!!**

- What the... world are you talking about? You just contradicted yourself. You said yourself, the limit of f(x)=1/x as x approaches 0

- Yes, the general limit of f(x) = 1/x does not exist because as I said, there is an infinite discontinuity at x = 0. However, didn't you say above that you're in a calculus course? If so, haven't you learned about one-sided limits and how they relate to the general limit? A general limit of a function f(x) exists at x = a if and only if f(x) tends towards the same value both from the left side and from the right side as x approaches a. Consider the function f(x) = 1/x^2 rather than f(x) = 1/x; in this case, the limit as x approaches 0 is positive infinity since the function approaches that result from both the left- and right-hand sides. The only reason that 1/0 is technically termed "undefined" is because it might be the result of the limit as x approaches 0 for f(x) = 1/x, which is undefined, or the result of that limit for f(x) = 1/x^2, which is positive infinity, or it might be the result of the limit only from the right side for f(x) = 1/x, which is also positive infinity. We don't know what case it is purely from seeing "1/0", and this is why 1/0 is termed "undefined." -Luke

- Luke, man... I love your style. Math is fun. You should think about setting up a user page. -- Tom

- I am taking calculus next year, but I know about one-sided limits. Anyway, I think we were both missing the point there. let's say for example you take the limit from one side and say that the limit of f(x)=1/x as x approaches 0 is infinity. That's true, but we're missing the point. Tell me this, if the limit is infinity, does that mean that x=0 will
**ever**have**any**value for f(x)? No. x=0 is an vertical asymptote and by definition nothing in the function ever intersects it. ever. And so the value of f(x)=1/x if x=0 is undefined. Limits is not what we're talking about here. Limits is not the same as having a value. the limit of x/x as x aproaches 0 is one, but there is no point at x=0. --TehMilkman

- I am taking calculus next year, but I know about one-sided limits. Anyway, I think we were both missing the point there. let's say for example you take the limit from one side and say that the limit of f(x)=1/x as x approaches 0 is infinity. That's true, but we're missing the point. Tell me this, if the limit is infinity, does that mean that x=0 will

- I'll take your silence as meaning you acknowledge my correctness. w00t. --TehMilkman

- You have to use L'Hospital's Rule. I'd love to explain it, but I can't type that here. Check [this].

- What? Nobody said anything about taking any limits for one to need L'Hospital's rule. 0/0 is an indetermination. That only means you cannot say "0/0 is THIS point" in the extended real number line (which include plus and minus infinity). - Lucio

- None of the above matters because the definition of zero is containing no quantity. Clearly jillion is something, therefore it will cancel itself out. Quasi_Real.

- We're missing the point that a jillion is a unit of measurement. You can always divide units of measurement by themselves, such as kg/kg, m/m, W/W, and so on, to give 1. - Lucio
- Actually a jillion is a number. Maybe not a real one, but it is a number, not a unit of measurement. So I don't think we're the ones missing the point.
- Time for some real nerdulence. We name numbers by powers of 10 (i.e. 10^6 is a million). No matter how many powers of 10 we name, there will always be an infinite number of unnamed powers. We also know that there are infinite words that can be made from the letters of the English language (because of the infinite number of letters each word could have). Therefore, the ratio of words to powers of 10 is infinity:infinity, or 1:1. Any word in the English language, including "jillion," is the name for a power of 10; we just haven't assigned it yet. :P --El Zilcho
- evil...nice nerdance Zilcho The Cheat Is Not Dead

- The number of possible words in the English language is NOT, in fact, infinite. Take a small example: a combination lock with two numbers has possible combinations 00-99. That's 100 possible combinations. There are ten possiblities for each number, 0-9. Therefore, the maximum possible number of combinations derived mathematically is 10*10, or 100. Similarly, a lock with three numbers would have 1000 possible combinations, or 10^3. Here's the sticky part. Yes, mathematically, there is an infinite number of words because you could just keep expanding the word by one letter. However, no one would EVER want to memorize, use, or pronounce a word 1000 or 1000000 letters long....or more. Therefore, the number is limited. Let us take the longest single word in the English language that is listed in Oxford technical dictionaries: pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis (a lung disease). It is 45 letters and utterly unusable in any normal situation. More commonly cited is antidisestablishmentarianism, which is 28 letters. So 30 is a nice round number. Following the combination lock example and taking 30 as a generalized upper limit of the length of words in the English language, that leaves 26^30 words up for grabs, or 2813198901284745919258621029615971520741376 words. A moot point, since your argument is that there are simply new words that can be applied for a power of 10. But a point nonetheless. Muwahahahahaha.
- Also, Zilcho stated it this way: "infinite words that can be made from the letters of the English language", not infinite _English_ words. Uh-oh, things do not look good for Homestar Runner.
- The number of
*possible*words in the English language*is*infinite, because as you said, we could just keep tacking on more and more letters. What you have described is the reason for the fact that the number of*realized*words in the English language will never be infinite. There's a difference. -Luke

- My point is not how many words we could use in everyday life, I'm just saying that infinity:infinity = 1:1. Even using your idea, "jillion" would probably be named as a power of ten before antidisestablishmentarianism, and that's what this discussion is (supposed to be) about. Now I've gotta quit this before I start getting too serious about it. -EZil
- I can not let this go. I have a Master's Degree in Mathematics. Infinity divided by Infinity is NOT 1:1 any more than 0/0 is 1:1. Both Infinity/Infinity and 0/0 are out of any functional context, and would be (in this case) undefined. But I'm not being paid to help you with your math homework. Good luck. --Buz
- OK, fine. All I meant was that we could never have a word that we couldn't correspond to a power of ten. The infinity:infinity thing was the best way I could think to express it. Jillion is theoretically an undefined power of ten. Even if it wasn't, it definitely wouldn't be zero, so indeterminate and undefined don't enter into it. -El Zilcho

huh?

*None of the above matters because the definition of zero is containing no quantity. Clearly jillion is something, therefore it will cancel itself out. Quasi_Real.*I think this is the winner. I am trying to get a degree in Math (not so successfully, but trying). As far as I can tell this is the point. The two problems with diving numbers by themself arise when you do 0/0 or infinity/infinity (or at least, that's the impression I am under). A jillion clearly isn't 0, but I suppose it is debateable as to whether or not it is infinite. I would say if it isn't, then 2 jillion emails every 2 jillion seconds would mean 1 email a second. :) That's just me though. (I always assumed a jillion was like a million dollars more then I will ever make in a year... or the price of a lamborghini) -Stu- An average of 1 email per second. If there are 2 jillion emails every 2 jillion seconds, then it is possible for all 2 jillion emails to be received within the space of a minute at some point during those 2 jillion seconds, unless every email is sent at regular intervals. -torq

- It is an average of one emails per second because "jillion" is not zero or infinity, just a made of power of ten. It is therefore a determinable number so follows the rule X/X or X:X equals 1. -CE5

I'm only in 9th grade and I understand every word of your mathematical conversations. Does that mean I'm really smart? -Da princess

Now seriously, how many people here are thirty and live with their parents?-The Grandpa

Technically, if you look in a math textbook, anything divided by 0 is indeterminable. However, let's use a normal situation; there is a hard-boiled egg sitting alone in a room. If no one is there to eat it, it therefore can't be divided by anything- so it's the original number. Or, how about this; Jimmy has a bad apple. He is hanging with his three best friends. Nobody wants the apple. Thus, it is divided zero ways- 1/0. You still have one apple. If you divide by nothing, you're not really dividing by nothing- you're just letting it be. No, I don't have a life.

- Yes, but if the apple is divided zero ways, then "you" can't have the apple, it is, in fact, left undefined (or indeterminable) as to who actually has the apple, since it has been divided zero ways. Bizarre analogy that fails to make your case.

- If you leave the apple be, you essentially have divided it up into one piece, since you left it alone as it was before. You're taking the whole apple and dividing it into one piece: 1 apple/1 piece = 1 apple/piece, and since you only have 1 piece, you're just left with the whole apple. For any integer
*a*, 1/*a*is the size of an single apple piece if you divided up the apple into*a*pieces. 1/0 would be the size of a piece if you divided up the apple into*zero*pieces. What does that mean? I don't know; you tell me. That's why 1/0 is termed "undefined." -Luke

Yeah, Homestar's being a tad more intelligent, and Strong Bad definitely has more respect for him. err... *realizes irony of saying that after an email in which SB punches him in the face* But like, he allowed him to talk and whatnot. I read in one of the interviews that they are taking some of the content into a new direction, developing other characters so it's not so much Strong bad centric. I guess that's what we're seeing. And um.. I don't exactly see what your hard-boiled egg and an old apple has to do with dividing by 0. From what I know, Anything divided by 0 is

--Man of Milk

Okay people, I'm here to settle this. I'll say that the number two jillion is represented by X. In this case, two jillion/two jillion=X/X. Anything over itself always equals one, therefore he gets 1 e-mail a second.-Bob

Wow, major Nerdular Nerdance here!Lol -- get_a_jorb

Whoa! So much...math...head...spinning...uhhhh...*faints* -Shopiom

Okay, I get it now. But its actually a statement of fact to the third pie in kitchen terms. I mean, if 12 minus B red is equal to the amount of peanuts the eliphant will eat according to the properties of the purple time space rock, the plane can carry 12.4 loads with the exception of scizzors. I think of it as a very factual pencil shaving on the name for the carrie-load on the realm of Guhshovalbo in the third square. Please post in my hrwiki.org name which is GoombaKing if you want me to describe this to you.- GoombaKing