0

so I came up with this idea:

the real projective line defines that $\infty = - \infty$. What if I divide any value $x$ (not equal to $\infty$) by infinity? Would that be 0? or "something" between $x/\infty$ and $x/-\infty$?

Would be very interesting

Grx

Plutoro
  • 22,730
  • 3
  • 41
  • 71
A_K
  • 1

1 Answers1

0

It depends entirely on how division is defined on the real projective line (which I will denote $S^1$). We could say that $S^1$ inherits the same operations as the reals (keeping in mind that $\infty$ is not a real number, and it's role in algebraic operations can only be defined in terms of limits, which inevitably leads to ambiguity) then the answer to your question is yes, $x/\infty=0$ for $x\neq\infty$. But the problem here is that the resulting algebraic structure is not very nice. There is sum ambiguity as to what $\infty+\infty$ means, among other things. Whatever it is, it is certainly not a field, in which multiplication and addition are nicely defined with inverses and identities. (I think it is actually impossible to define a field with continuous operations on $S^1$, maybe someone with a better understanding of algebraic topology can prove this?) We could imagine that $S^1$ is the unit circle in the complex plane with 0 being identified with 1, and $\infty$ being identified with $-1$. This leads us to a rather natural multiplicative operation which is that if $x,y\in S^1$, then $x\cong e^{i a}$ and $y\cong e^{i b}$ for some real number $a$ and $b$ between $-\pi$ and $\pi$. Then $x\times y$ could be defined to be $x\times y \cong e^{i(a+b)}$. This results in a very nice group structure with a well-defined division. Thus, the answer to your question in this case is that $x/\infty\cong e^{i(a-\pi)}$, which depends on $x$.

There are probably other was to define division in $S^1$, but (as with anything in mathematics) it has to be a useful definition for anyone else to care. So I guess the real answer to your question is that it can be anything you want it to be, as long as the system of division you invent is well-defined.

Plutoro
  • 22,730
  • 3
  • 41
  • 71
  • Wow. Thanks for answering that quickly. It would be great if there was a way to define devision in S1... :) – A_K Jun 30 '15 at 17:31
  • but what if we were to apply the 'standard' definitions of addition, etc.? wouldn't ∞+∞=∞, because ∞+x (including ∞) =∞ ? So I guess the circular line could just be like a straight line with attached ends, but with no field in its centre. I'm just talking real numbers here, so numbers that aren't real would create a new axis (like in a normal diagramm) and it'd become a sphere...so that it has no inner volume and we were just to look at the 2dimensional outer surface...that would ectually result in us bending a 2d diagramm into a 3d space and observing it's 2d surface...wouldnt that work? – A_K Jun 30 '15 at 18:36
  • First, $\infty+\infty=\infty$ is fine, but now $\infty$ has not additive inverse. Second, when I say field, I mean an algebraic field (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_(mathematics)). Third, it is possible to view the complex plane (with a point at infinity) as a sphere. This works fine topologically, but just like you have trouble extending real algebra to infinity, you have trouble with complex algebra as well. You can define a nice group structure on a sphere (called SO(2), I believe), but I can't think of a continuous field structure. – Plutoro Jun 30 '15 at 18:46
  • For more information about algebra on closed manifolds, research Lie Groups. – Plutoro Jun 30 '15 at 18:46
  • Thank's alot for your help and answer :) i gonna research a bit more on that topic... again, thank you ALOT :) – A_K Jun 30 '15 at 20:39